■% 




I LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. I 



m 



M 



88 



STo. 



jg UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. § 







X s 



A PLEA 



FOB 



PANTHEISM. 



By JOHN S. HITTELL. 




Dfoto prit: 

CALVIN BLANCHARD: 

76 Nnpsau Street. 
1857. 



^u^° 



.Hs 



Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1857, by John S 

Ilittell, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the 

United States, for the Southern District of New York. 



L IIAUHRK, Stereotyper and Printer, 12 North William Street 



CONTENTS. 



pago 

Preface, . iii-x 

Chap. I. Physiology vs. a Future State, 1 

— II. Pantheism vs. Anthropomorphism, ... 24 

— III. Moral Responsibility, 38 

— TV. Absolute Truth Unattainable by Man, . . 45 



PREFACE. 

Those, who have had a clear view of the field of religi- 
ous philosophy during the last half century, know that all 
the heights of that field have been the scene of a bitter 
warfare between Pantheism and Anthropomorphism. They 
have seen that the former has become master of many of 
the securest strongholds ; that she has gained new ground 
and strength and courage, with every succeeding year : that 
she is confident of remaining complete master of the field 
at no distant time ;' that her entire defeat, judging from 
the past, is a matter of impossibility : and that the struggle 
must continue to be the main occupation of polemic relig- 
ionists in Christendom for several decades of years.* 

Pantheism is older than history. Hindoo philosophers, 
who lived before the foundations of the pyramids were 
laid, taught that Brahm, the universal spirit and force, 
pervaded every particle of matter from all eternity, and was 
inseparable from it. The same idea was adopted by some 
of the speculative Boodhists. In Greece Democritus, Anax- 
agoras and others refused to acknowledge the Zeus of popu- 
lar mythology and taught that the only God was the soul 
of matter. Indeed, Herder says, that none of the ancient 
philosophers conceived God as a being distinct from the 
world : and certain it is, that those most inclined to anthro- 

* Pearson the author of the latest and ablest work on the Anti- 
christian Philosophy of the day says that Pantheism is "in christian 
lands the most dangerous foe to Christianity.' ' 



VI PREFACE. 

pomorphism (among whom may be reckoned Socrates, 
Plato and Aristotle) used many expressions which are 
decidedly pantheistic. In modern Europe Bacon may be 
considered the first influential author who was unwilling to 
admit a deity independent of matter, but he was too much 
of a time-server to speak his sentiments clearly, and the sin- 
cerity of his professions of Christianity was scarcely doubted 
until the present century. His pantheistic opinions, how- 
ever, were discoverable in many passages, which did not 
fail to excite much thought among those who studied him 
carefully. Spinoza was the teacher who gave Panthe- 
ism a secure foothold in modern philosophy. His writings 
were models of speculative argumentation ; and his doc- 
trines were extensively adopted notwithstanding the abuse, 
misrepresentation and persecution to which he was sub- 
jected. Goethe seems to have been the first great follower 
of Spinoza, but he did little more for Pantheism than to 
express incidentally in his poems, his pity for the creed 
which could place its deity outside of nature. But the 
founder of all the schools of Pantheism, now in flourishing 
condition was Fichte, whose system was altered from that 
of Spinoza, and was itself subsequently subjected to other 
alterations by Schelling, Hegel, Oken, Cousin, Emerson, 
Strauss, Peuerbach and a multitude of others. Carlyle too 
should, perhaps, have a place in this list ; but beyond the 
fact that his religious system is pantheistic, nothing is dis- 
coverable about it. These metaphysicians entered the fold 
of Pantheism through the gate of Idealism : while Byron, 
Shelley and Wordsworth seem to have entered through the 
gate of poetic inspiration. It appears to have been assumed 
for a time that Pantheism was peculiarly the creed of the 



PREFACE. VII 

high class of speculative philosophers, and Coleridge spoke 
of it as the "inevitable result" of the system which makes 
the mind the centre of its own system, and declares that 
the external world has no existence, as perceived, indepen- 
dently of the mind which perceives it. But of late years 
a number of the leading naturalists have entered the pan- 
theistic fold through the gate of experimental investigation, 
and they claim that Pantheism is not the religion of Ideal- 
ism but of science. The metaphysical and the scientific 
schools are not in entire harmony, but they agree in all the 
important points and each is making considerable progress. 
In the meantime their teachings have reached the work- 
shop and the field, and a general interest is felt for a fur- 
ther acquaintance with the doctrines which have received 
the homage of the mightiest men of the age. In Germany 
particularly, pantheistic ideas have been widely disseminated 
among the people, and the leaven appears to be rapidly 
extending to Britain, France and America. Even the 
Chinese are subject to a similar influence, if Hue's assertion 
be true that many of the learned celestials " have fallen in- 
to a true Spinozism." 

It is my purpose to make the masses intelligent par- 
tisans in this war between Pantheism and Anthropomor- 
phism, if possible. It is not to be doubted that the victory 
will decide in favor of the more enlightened party. Philo- 
sophy, by its very nature, is destined to be the common 
property of all mankind ; and the perspicuous teaching of 
a truth, so as to be intelligible to the many, is a matter of 
almost as much importance as the original discovery and 
promulgation to a few. If this essay should not possess 
the clearness, in which its chief merit should consist, I may 



VIII PREFACE. 

hope at least that it will attract attention to the subject, 
and perhaps indirectly induce some abler person to do the 
work in which I have failed. 

It is no part of my plan to advocate the establishment 
of a church or organized society. The time appears to be 
fast coming when all churches, as the theatres wherein cer- 
tain mummeries are performed for salvation or edification, 
before a lot of persons standing on a certain platform, shall 
be obsolete. I am ready to confess with Emerson that 
"all attempts to project and establish a cultus with new 
rites and forms seem to me vain," and I rejoice that it is 
so. Religious formulas and mental freedom cannot well 
exist together ; and the downfall of the former is the cer- 
tain harbinger of the rise of the latter. 

By "Pantheism" I understand the doctrine that mat- 
ter and its qualities or conditions are the only existences, 
and that the forces, pervading matter and inherent in it, 
are the divine existence, which comes to consciousness only 
in man. Opposed to Pantheism is Anthropomorphism — 
the doctrine that a person exists who possesses omnipo- 
tent power, who created the universe and governs it, and 
who has a physical form and a mental constitution, similar 
to those of men. The Christians form the chief body of 
Authropomorphists, and it is particularly with them that 
the Pantheists must struggle for the mastery of public 
opinion. It will perhaps not be out of place that I should 
introduce a few texts here to show the christian doctrine 
in regaid to the divine nature. 

God has a human form. According to Genesis (I. 26. 
27) man was created in Jehovah's "image:" and since 
ma^i is a biped, Jehovah must be t lie same. It was i\\ ,x 



PREFACE. IX 

common belief in ancient times that the gods have bodies 
like men, and if Moses had had a different opinion he would 
not only have said so in unequivocal language, but he would 
have carefully avoided any assertion that divinity and 
humanity are encased in similar " images." Jehovah not 
only has the biped organization but he also uses his organs 
as men do*. He walked "in the garden in the cool of the 
day'" ( Gen III 8), selecting an agreeable time for a prome- 
nade. He " appeared" to Abraham, and took dinner with 
the patriarch, the meal being composed of veal, butter and 
milk. The two had a long conversation, which is preserved 
word for word. The mortal biped gave some very good 
advice to the immortal, who was about to "go down and 
see whether" Sodom and Gomorrah were so wicked as 
people said (Gen XVIII), So too he went "down" to 
confound the Babelites. He " spoke unto Moses face to 
face, as a man speaketh unto his friend" (Ex. XXXIII 
11), and afterwards he was so gracious as to show to the 
law-giver his "back-parts " (Ex. XXXIIL 23), whereby the 
latter was no doubt highly edified. As becomes a great poten- 
tate Jehovah has reception days, when he welcomes angels 
who are employed in carrying his messages and attending 
to his business in places where he cannot attend in person. 
It was on such a day, " when the sons of God came to present 
themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among 
them," that the conspiracy was formed between Heaven 
and Hell for the overthrow of Job ( Job. I 6). That Jeho- 
vah has a voice is clearly implied by the numerous conver- 
sations which he held with Abraham, Moses and others : 
and we learn that his voice bears a great resemblance to 
that of man. Samuel, when he heard it, supposed that it 



X PREFACE. 

was the voice of Eli (1. S. III. 8). The Almighty is not 
without mechanical skill, for it is written that " unto Adam 
also and unto his wife did the Lord God make coats of 
skin and clothed them" (Gen III. 21), and as the Father 
thus tried his hand at tailoring, so the Son subsequently 
became a carpenter (Mark VI. 3). After work, rest is 
required for Gods as well as men : and so " In six days the 
Lord made heaven and earth and on the seventh day he 
rested and was refreshed" (Ex. XXXI. IT). He dwelt 
only among his chosen people, never making himself mani- 
fest to the Heathens unless when fighting for his followers. 
Judea was his country, Jerusalem was his city, the Temple 
was his house, and the Ark was his throne. The Jews 
exclaimed " Oh thou God that dwellest between the cherub- 
bim" (Ps. LXXX 1), which were figures on the ark. 
Jesus said his Father was in " heaven," and when he was bap- 
tized, the Holy Ghost in the shape of a dove came down 
from the home of the Three: and the divine Jesus "is 
gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God" (I. 
Pet. Ill 22). So far as we can form an opinion from the 
language of Genesis, the authors of that book supposed 
man's mental constitution to have been originally different 
from that of Jehovah chiefly in the knowledge of good and 
evil ; and after that difference had been removed by eating 
the forbidden fruit, the creator remarked that the mortal 
had " become as one of us" (Gen III. 22). Such is the 
doctrine which Pantheism must vanquish. Final victory is 
certain and perhaps not far distant. 

The essays which compose this pamphlet were written 
for the second edition of The Evidences against Christianity 
by the same author, and will be inserted in that work. 



CHAPTER I. 



PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE. 

il Frown not upon me, churlish priest ! that I 
Look not for life, where never life may be : 
I am no sneerer at thy phantasy ; 
Thou pitiest me, — alas ! I envy thee, 
.Thou bold discoverer in an unknown sea, 
Of happy isles, and happier tenants there ; 
I ask thee not to prove a Sadducee.* 
Still dream of Paradise, thou knowst not where, 
But lov'st too well to bid thine erring brother share." 

Bykon. 

§ 1. The New Testament asserts that the human 
mind or soul, will live forever after the death of the body, 
in the possession of consciousness and sensation, with the 
personality and individuality which characterize the man 
on earth, with thought and memory, and with capabilities 
of feeling pleasure and pain. That is to say after dying 
upon earth, every man will awaken to a new life, in which 
he will continue to be the same man as before, so far as his 
mind and thoughts are concerned. Jesus " came," as his 
followers say, ■" to bring life and immortality to light," to 
save men from infinite pain, and to secure to them infinite 
pleasure, in the future state of existence: and thus, the 
dogma becomes one of the most important of the Christian 
creed. When it falls, Christianity must fall with it. I 
shall endeavor to prove jt to be false, and I shall base my 
arguments against it, principally on the facts of physiology. 

* I place the words of the great poet at the head of this chapter, 
without adopting all his sentiments. Although he was a decided and 
active enemy of Christianity, he did not see fit to carry his hostility 
very far. I should be sorry, to deprive any one of the pleasures they 
may find in the hope of a future life, but the fear of any such result 
shall not prevent me from endeavoring to do justice to the cause of 
science, and intellectual freedom. The poet does not ask the priest "to 
prove a Sadducee," neither do I ; but I ask that men shall make them- 
selves familiar with all important truths of Physiology, and if they 
become " Sadducees" thereafter, they may thank natural philosophy — 
not me. 



2 PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE. 

All known natural objects are divided into three king- 
doms : the mineral, vegetable, and animal. These three 
kingdoms are intimately related to each other in many re- 
spects, — so intimately that the most learned scientific ob- 
servers have been unable to discover the lines which sepa- 
rate them. Each class is composed of innumerable millions 
of individuals, different in rank and character from each 
other, and yet so marked that they can be arranged in 
groups gradually increasing in complexity and beauty of 
structure from the coarse, shapeless, primitive rock, up to 
crystal, more elegant and regular in form than some low 
vegetables which are connected in the same kingdom by 
numerous and evident bonds of relationship with the mighty 
monarchs of the forest, with the sensitive plant and the fly- 
catcher ; and these latter are apparently superior in every 
thing, except the peculiar faculty called animal life, to some 
individuals of the worm and reptile classes, which again 
have their undisputed place in the same kingdom with the 
highest orders of the brute creation, and with man himself. 
Beginning at the rock, and ascending to the man, there 
is a chain of many links, and not one link wanting. Lin- 
neus remarks truly that nature makes no leaps. She has 
gone forward step by step ; the successive footprints are 
recorded in indelible characters on the face of the universe. 
None of her productions are kinless ; all are as though they 
had grown from one seed, which bore in its own bosom the 
faculty of developing itself into higher, more numerous, 
and more complex forms every year. 

The vegetables and animals are composed of elements 
which are to be found in the older kingdom. As its child- 
ren, they have taken its substance. The carbon, the oxy- 
gen, the hydrogen, the nitrogen, which exist in mineral 
form, are also found in the plants, which dig into the earth 
for their support. The same materials compose the greater 
portion of the frames of the animals, which devour the 
plants or their plant-eating brothers, and both plants and 
animals, as a general rule, must every day have new sup- 
port from air or water, or they die. The same general qua- 
lities mark the objects of the three kingdoms ; all have 
weight, extension, and inertia,. The same natural forces 
appear to prevail through, and to support, as they are, the 



MAN IS AN ANIMAL. 3 

three kingdoms. All are subject to similar mechanical and 
chemical influences ; all are influenced by heat, electricity, 
and concussion. It was supposed, for many ages, that ani- 
mal life was owing to a peculiar power, or vital force, un- 
known in the other kingdoms, and radically different from 
all the forces which exercise an influence therein. But this 
theory is now rejected by all the ablest physiologists. They 
can find nothing to support it ; they find much to contra- 
dict it. Every process, eYerj force discoverable in the ani- 
mal frame has its kindred process or force, in the mineral 
and vegetable kingdoms, in the chemist's laboratory, or the 
mechanic's workshop. The eye is a daguerreotyping estab- 
lishment ; the heart is a pump which forces arterial blood 
to the extremities, and sucks back the venous blood ; the 
liver is an acid factory ; the stomach takes the liver acid 
to dissolve the food ; the brain is a galvanic battery which 
telegraphs thought and sensation along the wires of nervous 
fibre with a kind of electricity similar to that which New 
York uses in speaking to New Orleans; and the muscles, 
when required to act, are filled with electro-magnetism, so 
that the ends may be drawn together, just as the opposite 
poles of a steel magnet would approach each other, if its 
material were not stubbornly inflexible. 

§ 2. Among the various kinds of animals, man is one. 
His body is material, and it possesses the distinguishing feat- 
ure of the animal kingdom — a nervous system. His frame 
bears a close resemblance to that of other animals. It is 
composed of the same elements, and is divided into the same 
organs with the same functions. Man has muscle and bone, 
skin and hair, feet and mouth, stomach and heart, senses, 
and blood, and brain ; and a dog has the same. And he is 
a pretty good chemist who will distinguish a slice of human 
muscle, or brain, or a drop of human blood from similar por- 
tions of the canine system. Men and brutes are alike pro- 
duced by generation, supported by nourishing food placed 
in the stomach and by a constant supply of air ; and they 
die from similar causes, either mechanical or chemical vio- 
lence, or the exhaustion by age of the life-sustaining power 
of their organs. The quadruped and the man have minds 
differing in power, but not differing substantially in kind . 
The brutes have reason, memory, and passion ; they are 



4 PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE. 

evidently actuated in many of their movements by motived 
similar to those which govern men. When young, they are 
playful, and grave when old. Their countenances and ac- 
tions at different times show plainly that the mind is filled 
with doubt, anger, revenge, fear, content, exultation, shame, 
joy, pride, love of frolic, and maternal love. They not only 
show these sentiments, but their characters are marked by 
the general predominance of certain mental impulses. They 
are " envious,* irascible, placable, [faithful, affectionate, J 
courageous, cowardly, vain, sober, haughty, humble, vindic- 
tive, generous, cunning, candid, [clever,] or stupid, just like 
human beings. According to the divisions laid down by phre- 
nologists, they possess benevolence, self-esteem, cautious- 
ness, love of approbation, hope, wonder, comparison, and 
many other of the faculties possessed by man. There is 
scarcely one of the ingredients of mind which is not be- 
stowed upon them, and they have perversions of the facul- 
ties from disease like man. They [more particularly dogs, 
horses, swine, and kine] go mad, and the mother destroys 
her offspring} under the influence of puerperal insanity, as 
women do." 

Brutes learn by experience, and that learning implies not 
only memory, but the faculty of reasoning by analogy. It 
is said that brutes and men are distinguished from each 
other in the possession of reason by the latter, and " in- 
stinct' 7 by the former ; but the probability is that both pos- 
sess instinct and reason, differing only in the different 
degrees of development. That brutes reason is shown by 
multitude of facts recorded in every work on zoology : and 
that men have instinct is also a fact scarcely to be denied 
by those who will look at the evidence. A singular case is 
related by Carpenter in his work on Human Physiology, of 
an idiotic girl in Paris, who, having been delivered in soli- 
tude of a child, when found, actuated doubtless by the same 
instinctive impulse which guides the brute-mother, had 
gnawn off the umbilical cord of her offspring. Man's very 

*\Yi«an.— On the duality of the mind. Ch. XXVI. 

f This offspring-murder is a frequent occurrence in the swine-raising 
counties of Ohio and Indiana. Sows which ordinarily show great affec- 
tion for their young, when provided with an abundance of food of every 
kind, set ujiun their offspring and devour thorn. 



MAN A MAMMAL. O 

great mental superiority in a state of civilization, and his 
evident superiority, even in the lowest state of barbarism, 
to the brute, is owing to a great extent to faculties which 
do not belong to the mind — to the hand capable of grasp- 
ing, to the erect form which leaves the grasping hand at 
liberty, and to the tongue, throat-muscles, and ear which 
give him the faculty of communicating his thoughts. By the 
aid of these faculties he is capable of educating himself, and 
of rising to a greatness far beyond the condition in which 
he now is. Without these he would e as near to the chim- 
pansee as the latter is to some of the lower orders of mon- 
keys. 

Man belongs to a certain class of animals : he is placed 
by naturalists among the "mammalia" — that class which 
give birth to their young alive, and suckle them at the 
teat — that class which includes the ape, the elephant, 
the lion, the wolf, the mouse, the opossum, and the whale. 
The unscientific observer might say that nature had made 
a great leap from the disgusting brutishness and vile form 
of the ape to the beautiful and majestic body, and all-com- 
prehending mind of a Goethe. But that vast distance 
was not made at one leap ; there are many steps between 
the two points. The infant and the idiot, connected by 
steps, infinitely small with the greatest philosopher, are 
inferior in intelligence to the ape : and Solly, a physiologist 
and author of high and undisputed merit, declared that 
there was a greater distance between the minds of a Newton 
and a common hewer of wood and drawer of water, than 
between the mind of the latter and that of a dog. But the 
idiots, children, and uneducated persons of the Caucasian 
family are not the only humans, nearly related to the brutes. 
The lowest tribes of savages connect* "with the beasts in 
the most unmistakeable manner by a multitude of the most 
striking resemblances. The long arms, the form of the 
foot", the thin calf, the long narrow hands, the general 
leanness, the projecting lower jaw, the low sloping fore- 
head, the small head running far back, the short neck, the 
narrow pelvis, the prominent belly, the beardless chin, the 
dark skin, the abominable smell, the filthiness, the grimaces 
in speaking, and the sharp shrieking tones of the voice are 

* Buechner, Kraft und Stoff. 



O PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE. 

so many marks of his near relationship to the ape.' And 
through his kinship to the ape and the other man nalia, 
he is akin to the bird, and the fish, the snake, the shelllish, 
the bug, the worm, and the polypus. Indeed, physiologists 
say, that man is a member of different lower orders at 
different times — so far as can be distinguished by external 
signs. While in the progress of formation, previous to 
birth, the human brain takes first the form of the brain of 
a fish; then that of a reptile; next that of a bird, then that 
of a low-class mammal, and finally, after having gone through 
all those stages, after having, as it were, belonged to four 
inferior orders, it is developed one step farther, to humanity. 

There is one more point in which the near relationship 
of man to the lower animals is clearly observable, and al- 
though the consideration of it is necessarily in itself dis- 
agreeable, yet it should be looked at, since this professes to 
be a treatise on a matter of science, and science knows no 
feelings of bashfulness or delicacy — much less of prudery 
and false modesty. There are many records in history of 
hybrids — half man, half brute. The human had crossed 
breed with the beast mammal ; and the offspring bore wit- 
ness that the parents were, made of live flesh and blood. 
But mammal and bird cannot produce a hybrid, neither 
can bird and fish : there is not enough relationship between 
them. Man is nearer to the clog than the dog is to the 
bird — nearer than the bird is to the fish — nearer than the 
fish is to the mollusca. 

§ 3. The animal frame, in all its parts, appears to us to 
be made with an evident adaptation to certain ends, so far as 
we know, aud much study has been devoted to the subject, 
and progress made in accumulating and comparing facts ; 
every particle of the human system has its use — its purpose. 
The frame is divided into parts which differ from each other 
in form and material, and each of these parts or organs has 
a different function. The bones serve to stiffen the frame 
and shield the most delicate and important of the vital 
organs ; the muscles give mechanical force and the power 
of locomotion ; the stomach manufactures from the food 
new material to mend the constant wear and tear of every 
part of the system : and the nerves of sense enable the body 
to perceive its relations to other bodies beyond itself. IS'o 



THE BRAIX A VITAL ORGAN. 1 

two organs have the same function : the heart cannot secrete 
bile ; the liver cannot pump blood through the arteries and 
veins ; the stomach cannot do the work of the kidneys. 
This division of the animal frame into various organs with 
different functions is almost infinite in many portions of 
the body, minute particles of flesh, invisible to the naked 
eye, have tasks to perform, different from those of other, 
equally minute particles at their side. 

The most noteworthy of the larger divisions of the 
animal frame is the head. It is the exclusive seat of the 
majority of the senses — sight, hearing, taste, and smell — 
the special organs of which are among the most delicately 
organized parts of the body. The head is also a vital 
organ ; there is no method of taking life quicker than by 
wounding it. The largest portion of the head is the brain, 
a mass of matter with an exceedingly fine organization, 
surrounded and protected by a strong case of bone. The 
delicate material and guarded position of the encephalon 
and its vicinity, to the most sensible parts of the frame, 
would lead us, without knowing anything of its func- 
tions, but reasoning, according to the general analogies of 
nature, to believe that it is one of the most important 
organs — that it exercises some of the most important func- 
tions of the system : and physiologists assert that it is the 
organ of the mind, and as a necessary corollary in physio- 
logy that the mind is the function of the brain. We shall look 
at some of the evidence, on which they found their belief. 

§ 4. The most important of all the animal faculties is 
the mind. By its means the animal is conscious and sensible, 
capable of feeling and thinking, capable of knowing the pre- 
sent, rememberiug the past and anticipating the future. 
Rank among brutes as among men, depends to a great ex- 
tent upon it; and it is justly entitled to the elevated position 
in the brain and the strong protection of the skull. That 
faculty — mind — is the function of an organ, as all the 
other animal faculties are ; and although it differs in its 
nature from all the other animal functions, yet these again 
differ from each other : digestion, muscular power, sight, 
smell, feeling, and blood-pumping have as little resemblance 
to each other as they have to the mind, yet they are all 
animal faculties. 



s 



§ 5. Observation has established the fact that certain 
relations exist in all cases between the organs and their 
respective functions: and where those relations are found to 
exist between a faculty and a part of the frame, it is pre- 
sumed, unless there be evidence to the contrary that the 
former is the function of the latter. Thus it is a general 
rule of physiology that the function is dependent for its 
normal action on the healthy condition of its organs. If 
the stomach be disordered, it will not digest well. If the 
heart be pierced by a sword through the centre, it will be 
unable to send the blood through the system. If the mus- 
cles of the thigh be divided transversely, they cannot sus- 
tain the body. To injure the nerves of sight, smell, and 
hearing, is to injure those functions, themselves. And a 
similar relationship exists between the brain and the mind. 
When the former is diseased, the latter is disordered. The 
blow which wounds the brain, wounds the mind. Perhaps 
the injury to the function is imperceptible in some cases, 
but it is, in all probability, none the less real. When the 
brain is irritated by the presence of intoxicating liquor, the 
mind becomes drunk, loses the clearness of its perceptions 
and does things which it would never do, which it would 
shrink from with horror, while sober. If the skull be bro- 
ken so that the finger can be pressed in upon the brain, 
the pressure will render the man unconscious and insensible, 
and while the pressure continues he has no more mind than 
a chicken with its head cut off. The experiment has been 
tried frequently and the same result was always found to 
follow. So too a pressure on the brain produced by other 
causes may produce unconsciousness. The bursting of a 
blood vessel in the brain causes apoplexy and sometimes 
death, by the pressure of the blood on the organ which is 
the tru£ seat of life. 

" We know* the simple fact that all the manifestations of 
mind depend on physical structure — that every change 
therein is accompanied by a greater or less change in the 
mind — that its qualities, its sentiments, its opinions, its af- 
fections, its belief, its propensities and its passions are per- 
mitted to be influenced, strengthened, weakened or perver- 
ted by disease in the physical structure of the system — that 

* WlGAN. 



MIND CONNECTED WITH BRAIN ONLY. \) 

a blow on the head shall entirely alter the moral character 
of the individual — that slight inflammations of its structure 
shall change modesty, reserve and devotion into blasphemy 
and obscenity — that a small spicula of bone from the inter- 
nal surface of the skull, shall transform love into hatred — 
that other diseases shall make the sober-minded man vaie 
and silly, turn the hero into the coward or the coward in- 
to the ferocious bully — shall make the tender mother de- 
stroy her own offspring, and the loving husband put to 
death the object of his long-tried affection." 

The mind is affected directly by the condition of the 
brain and not by that of any other organ. The loss of an 
arm or a leg, or of both arms and both legs, does not per- 
ceptibly injure the thinking faculty. Any part of the body 
below the chin may be seriously injured, without immediately 
affecting the mind. It is true that any obstruction in the 
flow of blood to the brain affects the mind, and a total 
stoppage causes a loss of consciousness, and death : but this 
fact affords no evidence against the theory that the brain 
is the organ of the mind. All the fleshy fibres of the ani- 
maPs frame must have an uninterrupted and sufficient sup- 
ply of good blood to enable them to act in a healthy man- 
ner : and if that supply be not furnished, the muscles, the 
stomach, the liver, and the kidneys will u strike" work as 
quickly as the brain. 

§ 6. Another general rule, prevailing in the relations 
between organs and functions, is that the latter are strong in 
proportion to the size of the former. A large muscle is 
stronger than a small one : a large liver secretes more bile 
than a small one : a large stomach digests more food than 
a small one : and a very large olfactory nerve is usually con- 
sidered indicative of a very acute sense of smell. The same 
rule prevails in the relationship between brain and mind. The 
fact may be perceived most readily by comparing different 
classes of animals. The long ladder of animal life, reach- 
ing, as it were, from heaven to earth, with thousands of 
rounds, beginning at man and running down step by step 
in the scale of physical development, gradually decreasing 
in beauty, strength and complexity of frame, and variety, 
vigor and grace of motion, is marked by an equal decrease 
in intellectual power and the amount of brain, Man is far 



10 PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE. 

superior in intelligence to all the other animals, and his 
brain is absolute larger than that of any other except the 
elephant and whale : and it is also larger in proportion to 
the size of his frame than that of any other animal, with a 
few exceptions of the sparrow species ; and these exceptions 
are more apparent than real. The sparrow owes much of 
his relatively large brain to the full development of the sen- 
sory ganglia, that part of the brain which is the seat of 
sensation and consciousness, while the thinking part — the 
Cerebrum — is proportionately smaller than in man. The 
difference between the brain of the man and that of the 
dog, between the brain of the dog and that of the sheep, 
and between the sheep's brain and the tortoise's brain is as 
good a measure as we have of the respective difference be- 
tween their mental capacities. The same rule may be ob- 
served among men. The brain of women is usually one 
tenth less than that of men, and their mental faculties may 
be that much weaker. Infants have small, soft brains, and 
very weak minds — at first scarcely minds at all — and as 
the brain grows large and solid, the mind grows in activity 
and strength. A very small brain is a certain sign of 
idiocy, and very great talent is always accompanied by a 
very large brain. 

§ 1. A third general rule of the relationship between 
the functions and the organs is that those organs, whose func- 
tions are under the control of the will, must rest about one 
third or fourth of the time. The heart, the lungs, the liver, 
and some other organs not under the control of the will, can 
not be driven by the will to go faster, nor compelled to 
stop ; and they work, or can work, always without rest. 
But the muscles are under the control of the will, to a con- 
siderable extent at least ; and they must have rest six or 
eight hours out of the twenty-four. So the mind is under 
the control of the will liable to be driven to great exertion 
or over-exertion, and requiring also for the brains its share 
of rest every day. 

§ 8. A fourth general rule is that in old age the or- 
gans lose their vigor and strength, and the functions suffer 
a similar decay. The general loss of physical power, the 
decline of live in men after the age of forty or forty-five, is 
a matter of universal observation. All the organs appear 



DOTAGE AND WASTE, 11 

to lose ; bones, muscles, stomach, liver, and the organs of 
secretion generally. The brain decreases in weight also, 
but not so much as the muscles ; and therefore the brain, 
according to the experiments of Solly, is, on an average, 
heavier in proportion to the body at sixty years of age than 
at forty-five. And as the brain decreases in solidity, so 
does it lose force. Notwithstanding the constant and val- 
uable accumulation of knowledge and experience, there is 
probably no human mind so strong at sixty as it was at 
forty. The majority of great intellectual works have been 
planned and executed by men in the blossom or bloom of 
manhood. The memory of events begins to fail before forty, 
and continues to fail rapidly after that age. At sixty the 
mind ordinarily becomes perceptibly weak, and if a man lives 
to eighty without falling into decided dotage, he is con- 
sidered fortunate. Shakspeare, in his Seven Ages of Man, 
makes second childhood the natural termination of human 
life, and the truthfulness of his picture has been admired 
throughout the civilized world. 

§ 9. A fifth general rule is that the exercise of the 
function wears away the organ, and that the wear and 
tear is proportioned to the amount of the exercise. The 
muscles are worn out by physical labor ; the worn-out 
material is carried off through the pores of the skin and 
the kidneys. The chemist knowing the material of which 
the muscles are composed, and knowing approximately the 
amount of waste caused by great or little exertion, can, by 
examining the secretion of a man's kidney, and knowing 
the amount of time in which it was collected, may guess 
pretty near the truth at the amount of work done by him 
in that time. So, also, the exercise of the mind is always 
accompanied by a proportionate wear of the brain ; and 
the worn-out matter is carried off through the urine, where 
it may be distinguished and its amount discovered. 

§ 10. The sixth relation to which I shall here call at- 
tention, prevailing between mind and brain, as well as be- 
tween animal organs and their functions generally is, that 
over-exertion of the latter causes pain and disorder in the 
Jormer. Pain in the muscles is the consequence of extreme 
trials of the physical strength ; pain in the eye follows un- 
4ue exertion in the visual faculty ; pain in the stomach is 

3* 



12 PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE. 

the result of overloading the digestion; and in a similar man- 
ner severe application of the mind causes pain in the head. 

§ 11. A seventh general rule is, that, when a function 
is in active exercise, the organ demands a larger supply of 
blood than when at rest. This is true of the stomach/the 
liver, the kidneys, and the sexual organs. Its truth is con- 
firmed by many facts within the knowledge of every obser- 
vant man, and is recognised in all the works on physiology. 
The large supply of- blood is necessary to carry off the 
greater-than-usual waste, and to meet the increased demand 
for new material. The rule extends also to the brain and 
the mind. When the latter is active, or excited, the blood 
flows through the encephalon with greater rapidity and 
force than when the mental faculties are at rest. Sir Ast- 
ley Cooper observed and recorded a case of this kind in a 
youth, whose brain was laid bare ; and the learned surgeon 
gave his students the sensible advice, that, in treating 
wounds of the brain, they should be careful to keep the 
mind quiet. 

§ 12. Another general rule is that organs and func- 
tions are different in nature, the former being material, and 
the latter immaterial. The optic, the auditory, and the ol- 
factory nerves, the stomach, the muscles, and the kidneys 
are material, and have qualities belonging only to matter, 
such as extension, weight, and color ; and they are divisi- 
ble into certain elementary substauces, such as phosphorus, 
carbon, and so on; but their respective faculties, — sight, 
hearing, smell, digestion, physical strength, and secretion, 
— are immaterial, cannot be weighed, measured, or felt, nor 
be separated into substantial elements. Qualities of matter 
are in their nature immaterial ; if they could cease to be 
immaterial, they would cease to be qualities. The strength 
of a stick, the length of a block, the weight of a stone are 
things immaterial in themselves, and they cease to exist 
when the matter on which they were dependent, takes a 
new form. A function in its very nature is a mere quality 
of matter, — the office, employment, or faculty of a material 
organ. Such is the definition of the word " function," as 
given in our dictionaries, and we have no reason to deny its 
correctness. Like other organs and functions, the brain is 
material, and the mind is immaterial. The thinking faculty 



FUNCTIONS OF THE CEREBELLUM. 13 

has never been discovered by the knife, the scales, or the 
microscope, and like all other faculties, it will forever re- 
main uncliscoverable, except through its actions. Great 
importance is often attached by theologians to the immate- 
riality of the mind, as though that were the only immate- 
rial power which man possesses, whereas, on the contrary, 
there can be power which is not immaterial. Mind has no 
peculiar superiority in this respect over a thousand other 
functions of the animal frame. 

§ 13. The immateriality of thought is often spoken of 
as some tiling without analogy in the animal economy ; but 
every act of an organ, or exercise of a function, is immate- 
rial in the same manner. Thus, a movement of the arm, 
which is an exercise of the physical strength, as the func- 
tion of that portion of the body, is immaterial, and, indeed, 
every motion, or action, from its very nature, must be so. 
Thought is an act of the mind, and like all other acts, can 
not exist as a substance, in and for itself. 

§ 1 4. Physiology informs us not only that the mind is 
the function of the brain, but that different parts of the 
mind are the functions of different portions of the brain. 
The encephalon is composed chiefly of two divisions : the 
Cerebrum or upper part of the brain, and Cerebellum or 
lower and back part. Each of these parts has its peculiar 
mental function. 

The Cerebellum is the seat of the power of governing 
the muscles in harmonious action. "We* find its degree 
of development corresponding pretty closely with the variety 
and energy of the muscular movements which are habitually 
executed by the species ; the organ being the largest in 
those animals which require the combined effort of a great 
variety of muscles to maintain their usual position, or to 
execute their ordinary movements ; whilst it is the smallest 
in those which require no muscular exertion for the one pur- 
pose, and little combination of different actions for the 
other. Thus in animals that habitually rest and move upon 
four legs, there is comparatively little occasion for any or- 
gan to combine and organize the actions of their several 
muscles ; and in these the Cerebellum is usually small. But 
among the more active of the predaceous fishes, fas the 
* Carpenter. — Element* of Physiology. 



14 PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE. 

shark,) — birds of the most powerful and varied flight, (ag 
the swallow,) — and such mammals as can maintain the erect 
position, and can use their extremities for other purposes 
than support and motion — we find the Cerebellum of much 
greater size, relatively to the remainder of the encephalon. 
There is a marked advance in this respect, as we ascend 
through the series of quadrumanous animals ; from the ba- 
boons, which usually walk on all-fours, to the semi-erect 
apes, which often stand and move on their hind-legs only. 
The greatest development of the Cerebellum is found in 
man, who surpasses all other animals in the number and 
variety of the combinations of muscular movement, which 
his ordinary actions involve, as well as of those which he is 
capable, by practice, of learning to execute. 

" From experiments upon all classes of vertebrated ani- 
mals, it has been found that, when the Cerebellum is 
removed, the power of walking, springing, flying, standing, 
or maintaining the equilibrium of the body, is destroyed. 
It does not seem that the animal has in any degree lost tho 
voluntary power, over its individual muscles ; but it can not 
combine their actions for any general movement of the body. 
The reflex movements, such as those of respiration, remain 
unimpaired. When an animal thus mutilated, is laid on its 
back, it can not recover its former posture ; but it moves 
its limbs, or flutters its wings, and evidently not in a state 
of stupor. When placed in the erect position, it staggers 
and falls like a drunken man — not, however, without mak- 
ing efforts to maintain its balance. 

" When the Cerebellum is affected with chronic disease, 
the motor function is seldom destroyed ; but the same kind 
of want of combining power shows itself, as when the organ 
has been purposely mutilated. Some kind of lesion of the 
motor function is invariably to be observed ; whilst the 
mental powers may or may not be affected — probably ac- 
cording to the influence of the disease in the Cerebellum 
upon other parts. The same absence of any direct connec- 
tion with the psychical powers, is shown iu the fact, that 
inflammation of the membranes covering it, if confined to the 
Cerebellum, does not produce delirium. Sudden effusions 
of blood into its substance may produce apoplexy or para- 
lysis ; but this may occur as a consequence of effusions into 



FUNCTIONS OF CEREBRUM. 15 

any part of the encephalon, and does not indicate, that the 
Cerebellum has any thing to do with the mental functions, 
or with the power of the will over the muscles." 

§ 15. The Cerebrum is the seat of intelligence and mem- 
ory. " The results f of the removal of the Cerebral Hemis- 
pheres, in animals to which the shock of the operation does 
not prove immediately fatal, must appear extraordinary to 
those who have been accustomed to regard these organs as 
the centre of all energy. Not only Reptiles, but Birds and 
Mammalia, if their physical wants be supplied, may survive 
the removal of the whole Cerebrum for weeks, or even 
months. If the entire mass be taken away at once, the ope- 
ration is usually fatal ; but if it be removed by successive 
slices, the shock is less severe, and the depression it pro- 
duces in the organic functions is soon recovered from. It is 
difficult to substantiate the existence of actual sensation, in 
animals thus circumstanced ; but their movements appear 
to be of a higher kind than those resulting from mere reflex 
action. Thus they will eat fruit when it is put into their 
mouths : although they do not go to seek it. One of the 
most remarkable phenomena of such beings, is their power 
of maintaining their equilibrium ; which could scarcely exist 
without consciousness. If a rabbit, thus mutilated, be laid 
upon its back, it rises again ; if pushed, it walks ; if a bird 
be thrown into the air, it flies ; if a frog be touched, it 
leaps. If violently aroused, the animal has all the manner 
of one waking from sleep ; and it manifests about the same 
degree of consciousness as a sleeping man, whose torpor is not 
too profound to prevent his suffering from an uneasy position, 
and who moves himself to amend it. In both cases, the move- 
ments are consensual only, and do not indicate any voluntary 
power ; and we may well believe that, in the former case 
as in the latter, though felt, they are not remembered ; an 
active state of the Cerebrum being essential to memory, 
though not to sensations, which simply excite certain ac- 
tions." 

It is supposed that consciousness, which is not destroyed 
by the removal of either the Cerebrum, or the Cerebellum, 
must reside in the Sensory Ganglia, which are masses of 
nervous matter at the base of the brain, in front of the ikZe- 

| Carpenter. 



16 PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE. 

dulla Oblongata ; but physiologists have not yet been able 
to obtain so much evidence to prove its connection with any 
special portion of the brain, as they have found in regard 
to intelligence and the power of movement. That con- 
sciousness has its seat in some part of the brain, is consid- 
ered as conclusively established by the fact that pressure on 
the brain deprives the animal of that faculty. 

§ 16. We have thus traced all the more important, gen- 
eral bonds of union between the animal organs and functions 
from the consideration of which we could hope for any light 
upon the relation between the brain and the mind ; and we 
have found that every analogy leads to the belief that the 
latter is a mere function of the former. The condition of 
the mind depends upon that of the brain ; the strength of 
the mind depends on the size of the brain ; the brain, like 
other organs, subject to the control of the will, must have 
rest a third or a fourth part of every day ; the mind de- 
cays with old age ; the brain is worn away by the exercise 
of the mind ; when the mind is excited, the brain requires an 
unusually large supply of blood ; and over-exertion of the 
mind causes pain in the head. All these facts furnish strong 
evidence of the immediate connection of the thinking power 
with the encephalic matter. Upon the theory that the 
mind is the function of the brain, we can explain all the 
mental operations as well, at least, as by any other means, 
while, if we adopt a contrary supposition, we become in- 
volved at once in a multitude of serious difficulties. Dream- 
ing is explained very satisfactorily by supposing that part 
of the brain is asleep, and part in action ; and it cannot be 
explained at all, if the functional nature of the mind be de- 
nied : for dreaming is evidently a mental operation. The 
same remarks may be made of somnambulism, and cases of 
" double-consciousness." The phenomena of "unconscious 
cerebration," as Carpenter styles it, can be explained only 
on this theory. The most prominent of these facts is that 
the mind thinks unconsciously. Thus scholars frequently 
lay aside unfinished problems or dissertations for a few 
weeks, and in the mean time occupy themselves with other 
matter ; and when they return to their former labors, they 
find that their ideas are much clearer than while they were 
at work previously. The brain has been thinking on the 



THE GRAVE IS AN ETERNAL SLEEP. 17 

old train of ideas in the meantime, while the man has not 
been aware of any such operation. 

Against all this evidence, no rebutting testimony of any 
scientific weight can be adduced, not a particle worthy of a 
moment's attention. The works of the natural philosophers 
may be sought through in the vain search for any such tes- 
timony. " No physiologist," says Carpenter, " could ven- 
ture to deny, in the face of the crowd of facts, which force 
themselves on his attention, that all mental operations are 
inextricably linked with vital [material] changes in the ner- 
vous system." 

§ H. If the mind be a function of the brain, it follows 
as a matter of course, that it must expire with its organ. 
All functional activity and existence in the animal kingdom 
depend upon the animal life of the organs. When the eye 
is out, there is no sight ; when the auditory nerve is des- 
troyed, there is no hearing ; when the muscles are cut to 
pieces, there is no physical strength ; when the lrver is dead, 
there is no secretion of bile ; and we may safely say, that, 
when the brain dies, the mind dies with it, and dies forever. 
The grave is an eternal sleep. 

§ 18. That a contrary, doctrine prevails extensively 
among civilized nations, and that powerful religious inter- 
ests and vulgar prejudices are interested in sustaining it, 
are facts known to all ; but nevertheless, before such con- 
trary doctrine can obtain any scientific foundation, it must 
overthrow not only the analogies heretofore referred to, but 
also other analogies drawn from physiology, and the domain 
of nature. 

§ 19. If the soul live after the death of the brain, it 
must exist either with, or without the body. In the former 
case, how should the body be recalled to life ? How should 
all its scattered particles be collected ? Suppose that the 
scene of a battle had been turned into a wheat-field, and 
that the matter which formed the blood, flesh, and bones oi 
the soldiers, fills the heads of the grain, and thence is trans- 
formed into bread and into the systems of thousands d 
other men, who die with that matter in their bodies — tu 
which man would the matter belong, the first, or the second 
owner ? And suppose there «were a dozen owners ? The 
slaughter of Waterloo served to enrich not that field alone ; 



18 PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE, 

the bones were carried across the channel, and the English 
man grew strong again on the remains of his brother. In 
cases of famine, in shipwrecks and sieges, where men have 
eaten human flesh, digested it, and shortly afterwards died 
— to whom would the flesh belong in the other life ? When 
do the atoms collect ? and where ? What becomes of the 
body ? Does it remain on earth imperceptible to mortal 
senses, or does it bid defiance to the laws of gravity, and fly 
off to another planet ? Does it wander about naked, hun- 
gry, and shelterless, or is it furnished with food, clothing, 
and houseroom by some mysterious arrangements of Provi- 
dence, intelligible only to the perspicacious minds of the 
elect ? Do those who were infants, cripples, and men in sec- 
ond childhood, when physical death overtook them, become 
capable of moving about with ease ? A thousand other 
questions, which should be answered, if we are to believe 
the existence of the mind in connection with the body in 
another life, might be asked, and never can be answered 
reasonably. 

§ 20. But it may be said that the soul exists indepen- 
dently of the body, after death. If so, it must be such an 
" existence" as is now unknown to us. There are but two 
classes of " existences" known to philosophy and science — 
matter, and its qualities or conditions. Every existence 
belongs to one or the other of these classes. Time, eternity, 
space, forces, laws, and motions are the conditions and 
qualities of matter, without which they do not and can not 
exist. It was at one time supposed that heat, electricity, 
and light were " immaterial substances ;" but it is now 
pretty well established that they are only peculiar oscilla- 
tions or conditions of matter. If the mind exist after death 
independently of the body and brain, we must suppose it to 
be immaterial — that is a "thing" which is neither matter, 
nor a quality of matter, and which has no analogical rela- 
tive in nature. It may be asserted that it has a related 
essence in God ; but science and positive philosophy have 
never been able to discover God, much less to determine 
what his "essence" is : and the adoption of the wild suppo- 
sitions of the theologians in opposition to the firmly estab- 
lished facts of science, would be much like philosophic sui 
cide. 



NO THOUGHT WITHOUT BRAIN. 19 

§ 21. Again, all known forces are qnalities of matter. 
The mind is a force, and as such should likewise be a qua- 
lity of matter. Scientific investigation has never discovered 
force, of any kind whatever, which existed of, for, and by 
itself. Every known force depends upon matter, and its 
strength is measured, as a general rule, by the amount of 
the matter in which it is generated. No force exists with- 
out matter, and no matter without force. Animal force, 
chemical force, and mechanical force are all alike in this re- 
spect ; all depend upon matter for their existence, and upon 
the amount of their matter for their strength ; and we have 
no evidence to justify the assertion that mental force forms 
an exception to the rule. 

§ 22. Every thought in life is accompanied by a change 
in matter, and every action of any force implies such a 
change. Mind is a force, and exists, and manifests its ex- 
istence only in thought. Now, what reason can we find for 
believing that it shall think and act in another life without 
those material changes which invariably accompany its 
thought and action here ? No such reason can be found in 
the domain of science. 

§ 23. The existence of mind necessarily implies animal 
life. We never have seen, or in any way perceived a think- 
ing being, which was not an animal, possessed of a material 
body and a nervous system, and subject to that peculiar 
kind of combustion, which we call animal life ; nor have we 
any scientific evidence, any clear philosophic evidence, any 
evidence at all, to justify us in supposing that a mind can 
exist without animal life, or that there is any other kind of 
animal life than that recognized in our physiologies. 

§ 24. Man, during mortal life, can not think without 
brain. Shall it be different after death ? Shall the disso- 
lution of the body set the function free as from a prison ? 
What virtue is there in death to release the mind from de- 
pendence for its sanity on the health, for its strength on the 
size, and for its existence on the animal organization and 
activity of the encephalon ? Shall the man possess memory 
and intelligence beyond the grave without Cerebrum, and 
consciousness without Sensory Ganglia ? Shall he see with- 
out eyes at all, when a mere bandage, over them here, makes 
him blind ? Shall he hear without ears, smell without nose, 



20 PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE. 

move without muscles, and talk without tongue ? Oi &Ldll 
he live in utter darkness, loneliness, and quietude, unuble to 
communicate with any thing beyond himself, and sit for- 
ever thinking of nothing ? Shall the passions which are por- 
tions of the mind here, and which act only to demand gra- 
tification for physical wants, — shall they be active without 
reference to a material body ? Shall the faculties which are 
necessary in earthly struggles, find a new sphere of action 
in the field beyond the Styx ? Do the other animal func- 
tions, as well as the mind, exist independently of their or- 
gans ? Do they journey together to the Elysian Fields ? 
Do they, which were here united by the bonds of a mate- 
rial body, preserve their partnership there, or do they se- 
parate, and each go prowling about, seeking whom it may 
devour ? Have the souls of brutes admittance to the human 
heaven ? Are the apes admitted into genteel society ? Do 
the defunct pursue the same occupations, are they governed 
by the same tastes as when in mortal life ? Does the sainted 
cat chase, and tear, and torture the sainted mouse ? Does 
the dog still worship the man, or is new light furnished in 
the higher spheres, so that he sees the imperfections of the 
featherless biped, and the folly of canimorphism ? Are the 
sublimated souls dependent for their happiness upon mental 
occupation, and what is the subject of their thoughts and 
studies ? Do they love and hate, fear and hope ? Do they 
read the morning papers, and worship tailors ? Alas ! tell 
me, how do they live, ye who know so much of their exist- 
ence ! 

§ 25. But if the soul be immortal, is it not rather sin- 
gular that the immortality had a beginning ? Would not 
such an immortality be somewhat like an eternity with one 
end cut off ? And surely, nobody will assert that he lived 
in his present selfhood, before he was begotten by his pa- 
rents in the flesh. And without his present selfhood, he 
could not have existed before. He was not himself, if, pre- 
vious to his life, he had an existence, of which he now knows 
nothing. 

§ 26. Some authors, particularly physiologists, who 
have seen the utter impossibility of denying the absolute 
dependence of the intellectual powers on the brain * have 

# Wig an, Garth Wilkinson, and others. 



ARGUMENTS OF THEOLOGIANS. 



21 



argued that the mind and the soul are distinct, and that 
the latter is immortal, while the former dies with the body. 
They have, however, failed to tell us what the soul, as they 
conceive it, is ; they have failed to tell us whether it mani- 
fests itself in this life, — whether there is any proof of its ex- 
istence ; they have failed to tell us, whether it can think, 
and remember, see, hear, and feel ; they have failed to tell 
us the proof that its powers and qualities, and the manners 
of its action are such as they think. This whole theory of 
the possession of a soul by man, independent of both mind 
and body, is too absurd to deserve an argument. It is the 
last turn of the doomed hare of immortality. 

§ 2T. The evidences which the theologians advance as 
proof of the future life, are man's desire for immortality, his 
curiosity to know the cause and end of his existence, his 
conceptions of perfection — implying the existence of such 
perfection — his tendency to connect himself with a personal 
deity, and an invisible world, and the necessity of a future 
life in which divine justice, whose requirements are not ob- 
served in this, shall be vindicated in rewards and punish- 
ments. As to the longing for immortality, I deny that 
there is any feeling in the human mind, except as the crea- 
ture of superstition. Many nations have existed for centu- 
ries without the belief of another life ; and many of the 
present day have no expectation that their thinking powers 
will continue to exist after the death of the Cerebrum. 
Man has naturally no such longing ; his greatest longings 
are for happiness and sympathy on earth, and in those 
cases at least he generally finds that his longings do not 
furnish proof that they will be gratified. Man longs for 
pleasure, but he does not get it here ; why should he believe 
that he will get it elsewhere ? If longing may serve for 
proof of another life, it may prove also the conditions of 
that life, and one of the first conditions would be infinite 
and endless joy for all. The Christians may assert that 
this longing takes such a shape in their minds that they are 
certain — by an inward consciousness — that they will live 
forever. But this assertion is belied by their whole con- 
duct ; they fear death as the king of terrors, and they can 
have little faith in another life, or they could not be so sel- 
fish, mean, and tyrannical to their weaker brethren, as they 



22 PHYSIOLOGY VS. A FUTURE STATE. 

are. If man had a longing for immortality, it would be as 
good proof for immortality in this life as in another. 

We may conceive of a future state which might be the 
scene of endless pleasure and joy, intense beyond our pres- 
ent capacities and conceptions, indeed perfect, and if there 
were a possibility of our attaining such a condition we 
could not but hope for it, and look forward to it as an 
abundant recompense for the temporary sufferings of this 
life. The poet says that, 

"If, as holiest men have deemed, there be 

A land of souls beyond that sable shore, 

To shame the doctrine of the Sadducee 

And sophists, madly vain of dubious lore ; 

How sweet it were in concert to adore 

With those who made our mortal labors light! 

To hear each voice we feared to hear no more! 

Behold each mighty shade revealed to sight, 

The Bactrian, Samian, sage, and all who taught the right [" 

Sweet indeed it would be ; but if as most Christian men 
have deemed, nine-tenths of the human race go to hell, how 
bitter 't would be to find one's self there ! And perhaps 
it were not entirely sweet to find one's-self in heaven, and 
to discover that all one's dearest relatives and friends, and 
the greatest benefactors of the human race, were broiling 
in the fiery furnace below, in full sight of their writhings 
and in full hearing of their groans ! 

Curiosity for a knowledge of the causes and ends of 
existence can scarcely serve as evidence of a future life — - 
especially while men are making so much progress as at 
present in this life in gratifying that curiosity. 

But it is said that divine justice is not satisfied in this 
world, and a future life with rewards and punishments is 
necessary for the settlement of the accounts of good and 
evil, run up by man while in the flesh. I shall elsewhere attempt 
to prove that there is no personal divinity, as this argu- 
ment would assume, and that, if there were, man's actions 
could be directly traceable to him, and therefore not pun- 
ishable by him. If there be any assumption at all that 
justice must be done, the reasonable presumption is that 
the doing must take place where the evil is committed — 
and the assumption that justice will be done in another life, 
merely because it is not done in this, is most unreasonable. 



TESTIMONY CLOSED. 23 

" Are * there any marks of a distributive justice in the 
world ? If you answer in the affirmative I conclude that, 
since justice here exerts itself, it is satisfied. If you reply 
in the negative, I conclude that you have then no reason 
to ascribe justice in our sense of it to the Gods. If you 
hold a medium between affirmation and negation, by say- 
ing that the justice of the Gods at present exerts itself in 
part, but not in its full extent, I answer that you have no 
reason to give it any particular extent, but only so far as 
you see it at present exert itself" 

We have thus looked at all the testimony, worthy of 
note, for and against the dogma of the souFs immortality. 
That the evidence is all on the negative side, must, I think, 
be clear to every one. It was a bold and wonderful con- 
ception, and has served as a keystone for all the great 
creeds manufactured in the last twenty centuries, but man- 
kind shall soon see the day when it will be reckoned among 
the cast-off garments, which the human soul has outgrown 
and found to be no longer wearable. 

* Hume. 



CHAPTER II. 

PANTHEISM VS. ANTHEOPOMOKPHISM. 

" All are but parts of one stupendous whole, 
Whose body nature is and God the soul ; 
Warms in the sun, refreshes in the breeze 
Glows in the stars and blossoms in the trees, 
Lives through all life, extends through all extent, 
Spreads undivided, operates unspent." — Pope. 

§ 2T. The Bible indirectly asserts, or is said to assert, 
the existence of an anthropomorphic deity called Jehovah, 
who is personal, conscious, infinite, omnipotent, omniscient, 
eternal, self -existent, and independent of all other existence 
— who has or is a mind with thoughts and feelings similar 
to those of mankind — who created the material universe 
out of nothing by an act of his volition, and who now 
governs it by his will. 

The belief in some anthropomorphic deity or deities, 
more or less similar to the Christian conception of Jehovah 
prevails, and for many ages has prevailed, among the greater 
portion of the human race. I deny the existence of such 
an anthropomorphism, and shall endeavor to show that be- 
lief in it is contradicted by many well-known principles of 
philosophy and science, and that its alleged evidences are 
mere assumptions. 

§ 28. The first assumption of the anthropomorphists is, 
that because the mechanism of a watch proves that it was 
constructed by an intelligent personal maker, therefore, the 
much more wonderful mechanism of the universe and its 
various parts, proves that it was made by an intelligent 
personal divine creator. This assumption is the great, and it 
may be said, the only evidence which the Christian theolo- 
gians have of the existence of their personal deity. Paley's 
Natural Theology, which is the best work on the anthropo- 
morphic side of the question, is occupied almost exclusively 
with this assumption. 

The argument from design, as proof of a personal de- 
signer, implies that we see a necessary connection between 



NECESSARY CONNECTION. 25 

cause and effect, whereas it is a well-known philosophic 
principle that we can see no such necessary connection.* 
We can discover only that one natural phenomenon is in- 
variably followed by another ; and we call the former 
41 cause " and the latter " effect." We can discover only 
the sequence, not the absolute necessity of it. We may 
discover intermediate causes, 'and when we do so , we find 
in them the "why" of natural phenomena, but as for the 
relation between the cause and its immediate effect we are 
as blind as ever so far as necessary connection is concerned. 
If we see something new we can not have any knowledge 
of its qualities or effects by mere a priori reasoning ; and 
the only means we have of obtaining such knowledge is by 
arguing from the qualities and effects of other substances 
to which the new thing appears to bear an analogy. Ir 
w r e have never seen anything to which it is in any way ana- 
logous, then we can have no knowledge of its qualities or 
effects, until we have learned them by experiment. 

Now let us apply this principle to the assumption under 
consideration. We argue from the watch to the human 
maker, because we have often seen men, we know that they 
work according to certain rules which we call design, and 
we are familiar with their works. But if we argue that 
Gods work according to similar rules, we make an assump- 
tion which has no warrant in philosophy. No man has 
ever seen, or in any way perceived a God, or any work 
known to proceed from the hand of a God. To assert that 
Gods work according to design as man do, is indeed to as- 
sume the whole question at issue — whether there be a 
personal God. The apparent design in nature is admitted 
by all pantheists, but they assert that so far as we know 
the design exists only in our minds. We perceive a har- 
mony between the processes of our thoughts and the pro- 
cesses of nature, and forgetting that we are products of 
nature, we measure her by ourselves. " Man designs, na- 
ture f is." 4I The adaptation of means to ends," says Kant, 
"was brought into the world by man's reflection, which 

* This principle is admitted by the anthropomorphists. See 
Brougham's Natural Theology, Note III. There has been no at- 
tempt to refute Hume's great argument on the subject. 
H. G. Atkinson. Man's Nature and Development. 



20 PANTHEISM VS. ANTHROPOMORPHISM. 

was then astonished at the wonders itself had created." 
Design implies the use of means for the attainment of ends ; 
whereas we must suppose that an omnipotent and perfect 
being (if we are to argue about his existence and nature 
on assumptions from our own constitution as the anthropo- 
morphists insist) would attain his ends without the use of 
means — that in fact his thought of the end, and the desire 
of its attainment would be its attainment. 

But if the adaptation of means to ends be so apparent 
in the universe, what is the end of its creation ? We can 
not judge that the adaptation of means is good unless we 
know the end in view. So far as I know, God is represented 
by theologians as having only one purpose in the creation 
of the universe, and that is his own glory. Jonathan 
Edward's expresses part of the Christian doctrine when he 
says that Jehovah " glorifies himself in the damnation of 
the ungodly men."* The Bible says (Prov. XVI, 4), 
" The Lord hath made all things for himself — yea even the 
wicked for his glory." On this doctrine John Adams f 
comments thus : " He created this speck of dirt and the 
human species for his glory ; and with the deliberate de- 
sign of making nine-tenths of our species miserable forever 
for his glory. This is the doctrine of Christian theologians, 
in general ten to one. Now, my friend, can prophecies or 
miracles convince you or me that infinite benevolence, wis- 
dom or power, created and preserves for a time innumerable 
millions to make them miserable for ever for his own glory ? 
Wretch ! What is his glory ? Is he ambitious ? Does he 
want promotion ? Is he vain, tickled with adulation, exalt- 
ing and triumphing in his power and the sweetness of his 
vengeance ? " Perhaps the Christians will say that their 
opinions are misrepresented here ; but where shall we find 
them represented truly ? If they pretend to find in the 
universe a wonderful adaptation of means to ends, they 
must tell what the great end is. Will they confess that 
any end, which they can imagine, implies an absurdity ? 
Does their creator intend to furnish them with proof of his 



* Sermon entitled " The Torments of the wicked in Hell no occasion 
of grief to the Saints in Heaven." 

f Letter to Jefferson, Sept. H. 1813. 



SCIENCE VS. SUPERNATURALISM. 2t 

existence and nature in his works, and yet leave no purpose 
perceptible in creation ? 

§ 29. The second assumption is, that the forces inherent 
in matter, inseparable from it, and generated by it, can not 
suffice to explain all the phenomena of nature. This as- 
sumption is not only wanting in every kind of evidence to 
support it, but it is in direct. contradiction to the whole 
teachings of natural philosophy. Science is H the region * 
of universal law." She asserts that the law reigns through- 
out the universe, that every natural phenomena occurs un- 
der a law, as the effect of a sufficient natural cause, and 
she denies most emphatically the existence of any force, 
which is not inherent in matter. Science recognises no su- 
pernatural force, and wherever she has seen the superstition 
of the supernatural entrench itself in a stronghold, she has 
laid siege at once, and has succeeded in blowing it up, or, 
at least, she maintains a rigorous blockade, varied with 
occasional fierce assaults, which can not fail to be success- 
ful at last. She was told that every natural occurrence is 
the immediate act of a supernatural anthropomorphism, 
and she proved the assertion false in a vast number of in- 
stances. She was told that there are no forces inherent in 
matter, and she proved the assertion false. She was told 
that there are no natural laws, and she proved ifiat there 
are such laws. She was told that rain falls, because Jove 
wills it, and she proved that rain falls, because vapor is 
condensed in the air. She was told that Jehovah made the 
rainbow by an immediate act of his will ; she proved that 
the rainbow is the necessary result of the qualities of light 
and water. She was told that the earth was fashioned in 
its present shape by the hand of Elohim ; she proved that 
it had grown .to its present shape without help from any 
hand. She was told that the power of an omnipotent an- 
thropomorphism was shown in the government of the mo- 
tions of the heavenly bodies ; she proved thatihose motions 
are governed by the power of gravitation. She was told 
that God made the universe as it is ; she proved that the 
universe had whirled itself into shape. She was told that 
the present animal and vegetable kingdoms were commenced 

* J. D. MOKELL. 



28 PANTHEISM VS. ANTHROPOMORPHISM. 

and turned out complete in one day from the workshop of 
Elohim ; she proved that they attained their present posi- 
tion by growth, from lower conditions, as gradual as the 
development of the man from the child. She was told that 
God made man a living soul, and breathed into him the 
breath of life, and she proved that there is no force or 
power in man which is not the necessary result of his ma- 
terial organization ; that there is nothing in his material 
organization which does not belong to the mineral kingdom, 
and that in his growth there is no evidence of any super- 
natural power, or of any power, except such as is inherent 
in matter. Supernaturalism has seen ten thousand of her 
strongholds destroyed, while she has never gained the smal- 
lest victory ; and she has no reason whatever to hope that 
the future will be more favorable to her than the past. 
Wherever superstition has asserted that it saw the hand of 
a personal God, there science has shown that the hand of 
God was not, and that the hand of the natural law was. 
She has proved that force is inherent in all matter, and in- 
separable from it ; indeed, that matter is conceivable and 
discoverable only by its conditions, qualities, and forces. 
She traces force above force, and law above law, following 
up the chain of causes through thousands of links ; but in- 
stead of discovering, or even approaching an anthropomor- 
phic deity, she removes further from the conception of him 
every year, until it has become proverbial, that of three na- 
tural philosophers, it may be safely assumed that two are 
atheists — that is, unbelievers in anthropomorphism. Natural 
philosophy spoke her opinion truly through La Grange, 
when he asserted : "I have searched through the universe 
for a God, but in vain." Science believes in, and worships 
no God, save the natural forces, and the universal law. She 
has sworn eternal and unrelenting hostility to all sects which 
do not bow to her divinity, and she is now engaged in a suc- 
cessful war of extermination against all forms of superna- 
turalistic superstition. She asserts that every natural phe- 
nomenon is the effect of a natural cause ; and although she 
is not able in many cases to tell what that cause is, or, if 
she know the cause, to explain its mode of operation, she 
can at least appeal for the truth of her assertion to the cor- 
roborative testimony of a thousand analogies, knowing well 



ORIGIN OF LIFE ? 29 

that the supernaturalists can produce no evidence, either 
direct or indirect, in support of their theories. 

§ 30. The third assumption of the anthropomorphists 
is that the dominion of universal natural law, and a per- 
sonal governor of the universe, are compatible with each 
other. If there be universal and invariable natural laws, as 
science says there are, then they govern all natural pheno- 
mena, and there is no room for the influence of a deity. If 
these laws have prevailed throughout matter since the ori- 
gin of the universe, then the divine anthropomorphism can 
do nothing except, perhaps, wind up the great machine like 
an eight-day clock. If these laws are eternal, as science 
says they are, then he could wind his clock but once. The 
employment of natural laws and forces implies finitude in the 
creator, if there be one. Man uses secondary means, because 
he has not the power to do all his work directly ; and if we 
are to argue from human analogies to the existence of a 
God, we must suppose, that, when he uses laws and forces 
as his agents, he does so because he finds them necessary as 
aids in the management of an extensive and complicated es- 
tablishment. 

§ 31. The fourth assumption is that the universe and 
the different classes of natural objects, more particularly 
living beings, must owe their original creation to a design- 
ing personality. Most of those who make this assumption 
admit that all the present phenomena of nature occur by 
the influence of natural forces under natural laws, but they 
say that the blind forces could never have produced think- 
ing beings. It is upon " thinking beings, 7 ' animals, &c, that 
the anthropomorphists now specially rely, for it has been 
pretty well established that all the changes and conditions 
in the mineral kingdom can be entirely accounted for by 
the principles of science. They argue that the cause must 
be greater than the effect, that the cause must contain the 
effect within itself : and they assert that the forces of dead 
matter do not comprise consciousness, sensation, thought 
and wisdom. But this last assertion is not justified by 
facts. We have no reason to assume that our conscious- 
ness is greater than the forces which pervade the rocks and 
seas and clouds. Suppose we take a fresh egg and examine 
it. There is nothing in it but such elements as are known 



30 PANTHEISM VS. ANTHROPOMORPHISM. 

to chemistry — but such elements as are found in earth 
water and air : and these elements have no power or quali- 
ties except such as they would have in the mineral condi- 
tion. The egg has neither sensation nor consciousness. It 
is as dead as the pebble from the seashore or the rain-drop 
from heaven. We place that egg in a warm place, where 
it is subjected only to natural influences, without the inter- 
ference of any supernatural power, and a chick is produced 
which has sensation, consciousness and thought. It follows 
that the natural forces in the egg with the aid of external 
heat must have been greater than consciousness and sensa- 
tion. Now man is only a chicken of higher development : 
his sensation, consciousness and thought are not radically 
different from those of the feathered biped ; and we can 
trace his generation as we can that of the chick. Every 
portion of his system is mineral, and his mineral elements 
possess none save natural forces — operating differently 
indeed from any process in the mineral kingdom, because 
the arrangement of the particles is different. But the pan- 
theistic evidence does not stop here. It is not only prob- 
able that there are no supernatural forces in man because 
we can discover none, but it is as good as proved that those 
manifestations of thought, supposed to be superior to the 
blind forces of nature, are traceable directly to the latter 
as their cause. Electricity is evolved in thinking, and 
every thought is accompanied by a change of matter, such 
as accompanies, and indeed necessarily causes electrical 
action. The brain is a galvanic battery and the mind is 
its peculiar power. Thought is not greater than the flash 
of lightning in the sky : they are different developments 
of the same force. It may be considered a scientific cer- 
tainty that gravity, electricity, magnetism, galvanism, affin- 
ity and the mental power are only different modes of action 
of the same natural force*, which pervades all matter, is 
inherent in it, inseparable from it, coexistent with it from 
all eternity and to all eternity, and the only cause of all 
natural phenomena. It produces crystals, dew drops, tur- 
nips and chicks to-day from rude matter ; and we know 
that it might have given shape to the globe and to the uni- 

* Carpenter. Hum. Pbys. J. 120.— Grove. Correlation of the 
Physical Forces. 



ONLY ONE DIVINITY ? 31 

verse, as we are well satisfied that it did, though we were 
not eye-witnesses of the process. We have no reason what- 
ever to assume that the matter which exists now, was once 
non-existent, that the forces, which pervade it now did not 
always pervade it, or that the causes, which now suffice to 
produce all the changes in nature, did not always suffice. 

§ 32. The fifth assumption is that when the chain of 
causes arrives at a God, it must stop there. If we are to 
reason from the phenomena of nature, according to the 
analogies of human works, until we arrive at a divine an- 
thropomorphism, must we not go on and argue that that 
divinity is the effect of a greater one ? If man must have 
bad a personal creator because the watch had one, will not 
the same argument prove that the creator of man must 
have kad a creator likewise and so on in an endless chain ? 
And if we assume that gods are like men in working ac- 
cording to design, may we not also assume that, like men, 
they propagate their species ? What is there in our knowledge 
of the divine essence and nature to justify us in asserting that 
Gods are this and are not that ? To assert that a God is per- 
fect and therefore self-existent, and necessarily without par- 
entage, is to assume that our imperfect minds can appreciate 
perfection in works ; for unless the works be perfect we have 
no right to assume that the workman is. If we are con- 
sistent, after adopting the belief in a God, we must admit 
that he is only the descendant of an endless line of creators 
or progenitors. 

§ 33. The sixth assumption is that there is only one 
author of natural phenomena. The anthropomorphists say 
that the harmony of nature is proof that everything was 
created by one divinity. But when they assert that nature 
is harmonious, they assert what is notoriously false. Na- 
ture is not harmonious. The whole universe appears to be 
the scene of an endless strife. Evil pervades every part 
of the earth. Wherever there is sensation, there is pain. 
Hostile feelings and hostile interests wage fierce and griev- 
ous war with each other not only in the bosoms of indivi- 
dual men, and between societies of men, but also among the 
brutes. The land, the sea, and the air are full of strife and 
torture and murderous death. An endless cry of woe is 
heard throughout all nature. One half of the animal crea- 



32 PANTHEISM VS. ANTHROPOMORPHISM. 

tion is made so that it is compelled to murder the other 
half, — so that its pleasure consits in the sight of the torture 
of the other half. The history of humanity is a continuous 
picture of crime and suffering, and a correct description of 
the nations of the earth as they now are, would show, that/ 
one third of the human race obtain most of what they con-£ 
sider their comforts and pleasures by robbing and rendering v 
miserable the other two-thirds. When I look at the record 
of the tyranny, the slavery, persecution, and superstitions 
which have prevailed among men, am I to find in them the 
evidences of the glorious harmony of nature, proofs of the 
goodness and infinite love of the author of the universe ? 

That the structure of the sound eye is wonderfully curi- 
ous, and apparently adapted with skill far beyond that of 
man, to a purpose, I admit ; but what shall I say of the eye 
which is blind ? Does that exhibit design ? If design be 
evident in healthy and intelligent adult men, where is the de- 
sign in disease ? Where is the design in that arrangement 
of nature by which a large proportion of the children born 
die before arriving at physical or mental maturity ? 
Where is the design in abortions ? Where is the design in 
the constitution of those women who are keenly susceptible to 
the attractions of love, but who are so formed that maternity 
is certain death to them ? Who is it that shall set forth the 
wisdom and excellence of idiocy, malformation and insanity? 
If the various qualities, powers and beauty of the tender 
infant, the lovely girl, the ambitious youth, the loving 
mother, the great and good man demonstrate the existence 
of a perfectly wise and good God as their creator, what 
shall we think of the earthquake of Lisbon in 1755, de- 
stroying 20,000 such men, women and children at one blow. 
Did the joy and smiles which filled the city one hour before 
the event come from the same God who made the misery, 
excruciating torture and dying groans which followed ? If 
so, the authropomorphists must abandon their human analo- 
gies for once at least. 

As the theologians argue from certain natural phenom- 
ena, according to human analogies, until they arrive at a 
personal deity, we may with as much reason argue from 
other natural phenomena of an entirely different nature, 
according to the same analogies, until we arrive at a differ- 



ONLY ONE CREATOR ? 83 

ent deity. I| love and peace, wisdom and healthy animal 
organization are the proofs of a good god, why are not war, 
and hate, animal disease, and malformation, the proofs of 
an evil god ? When we see a large and elegant steamship, 
and are told that it and all its parts came originally from 
England, we infer that coal-miners, iron-miners, iron- 
founders, iron-forgers, lumbermen, sawyers, ship-carpenters, 
joiners, cabinet-makers, blacksmiths, painters, glass-makers, 
brass-founders, and a thousand other species of mechanics, 
who, as we know, aid in the construction and furnishing of 
steamships, must live there. Now, here is this universe, 
composed of parts, infinitely more varied and wonderful, 
and why shall we believe that it was made by one mechanic ? 
When we examine the steamship carefully, and find that 
one portion of the joiner-work is done very well, and another 
very poorly, we say that different mechanics were at work 
here : one of them was a good workman, and another was 
not so good, f If, after we had looked through this steam- 
ship, a person should tell us that it had been built by one 
man alone, and that his only reason for the assertion was 
the evident harmony of all its parts — that harmony imply- 
ing the agency of but one mind — who would believe him ? 
Would any sane man believe that the same mechanic had 
cut the trees, dug the coal, and smelted the iron ore ? And 
yet men like ourselves, assert most positively, reasoning as 
they pretend from human analogies, and knowing nothing 
more than they can learn by such reasoning, that the same 
anthropomorphism makes the still-born and the live-born 
child, the healthy and the sick man, the well-formed man 
and the cripple, the philanthropist and the professional 
murderer, the master and the slave, the cat and the mouse, 
the wheat-field and the cholera, the quadruped, the bird, 
the fish, the snake, the shell-fish, the insect, the tree, the 
shrub, the sea-weed, the air, the water, the crystal, the 
aqueous and igneous rocks, the earth, the sun, the moon, 
and all the planets, stars, and comets. If we argue from 
the various phenomena of nature to their creation by mind, 
we should believe that mind to be in a vast number of 
beings, very different from each other in moral and intel- 
lectual character. 

§ 34. The seventh assumption is that matter exists ab- 



34 PANTHEISM VS. ANTHROPOMORPHISM. 

solutely, and independently of our minds, whereas it will 
hereafter be shown that we have no evidence of any such 
fact. We think that we perceive matter, but in reality we 
perceive only a thought of matter ; and whether the matter 
conceived by the thought really exists, or whether the 
matter be such as we perceive it, are questions for which 
we can obtain no solution. But unless it be proved that 
matter exist absolutely, how are we to argue from it to *he 
absolute existence of its creator ? If the matter exists 
only in our perception then God must exist there too, and 
he is no more than the hallucination which passes through 
the brain of a madman. 

§ 35. The eighth assumption is that truth exists inde- 
pendently of man, and is discoverable by him. But we 
know that there is no truth except in the harmony of a 
proposition with our modes of thought. There is no truth 
in any proposition taken by itself. Then it follows that 
truth is merely a relative matter, — the creation, it may be 
said, of our own minds, — and God is reduced to a rank 
beneath ourselves. We make him, and then try to prove 
that he made us. He is at best a merely relative existence, 
— first me, then God. The nature of the existence of matter 
and truth will be considered further -in a subsequent 
chapter. 

§ 36. The ninth assumption is that infinity and per- 
sonality may coexist in the same being. " You give," says 
Fichte, " personality and consciousness to your God. What 
do you mean by ' personality J and * consciousness ? ? cer- 
tainly such qualities as you have found in yourselves, and 
marked with these names. But that they necessarily imply 
limitation and finite condition in their possessor, must ap- 
pear clear to you, if you pay the least attention to the 
nature of the ideas attached to them. By making God 
conscious and personal, you make him finite and like your- 
selves, and you have not thought a God, as you intended, 
but only an image of yourselves." " We feel and know 
ourselves to be persons," adds Strauss,* "only as distinct 
from other similar persons outside of us, from whom we 
are separated as finite beings. Formed in and for this do- 
main of finitude only, the word ' personality f loses every 

* Christliche Glaubenslehrc, § 33. 



WHERE DOES HE DWELL ? 35 

meaning beyond it. A being which has no other like it 
beyond itself, can not be a person. To speak of a personal 
divinity or a divine personality, appears from this point of 
view as a connection of ideas which exclude and annihilate 
each other. Personality is a self-hood fenced in against 
outsiders ; absoluteness, on the contrary, is the comprehen- 
sive, unlimited, infinite, which excludes all personality P 

§ 37. The tenth assumption is that creation is con- 
sistent with perfection and infinity. Creation implies that 
God felt a want, that he changed his purpose, that his 
mind became subject to the influence of new ideas, that at 
a particular moment he felt the necessity of doing what he 
had never clone before — in short that he was not perfect. 

§ 38. The eleventh assumption is that a personal divi- 
nity exists in some place while we can prove that he does 
not exist in any place within our reach. Here is a lump of 
coal. Will any of the anthromorphists assert that their 
divinity resides in it ? If they will, I can prove the falsity 
of their assertion by scientific means. I can crush and burn, 
and weigh and examine and analyse it in a thousand dif- 
ferent processes, but can find no mark of a personal or 
conscious God residing in it. Since personality and cons- 
ciousness, as men understand the words, are always dis- 
coverable by certain signs not to be found in the coal, I 
conclude that no personal and conscious being resides in it. 
And I can go through all the earth in the same way, prov- 
ing that the anthropomorphic God is not there. Where is 
he then ? When I can prove that he is not in anything on 
earth, shall I believe, without direct or indirect evidence of 
the fact, that he is in some other portion of the universe ? 
Why should he not be here as much as elsewhere ? Shall 
I imagine that he dwells elsewhere, merely because I can 
prove that he does not dwell here ? 

§ 39. The twelfth assumption of the anthromorphists 
is that we can believe in their personal deity, independent 
of matter, consistently with the analogies of nature, con- 
sistently with the facts that we do not know of any existence 
save that of matter and its dependent qualities, that we 
know oi no force which is not generated in matter, that we 
know of nothing which possesses life without material or- 
ganization, that we know of nothing which possesses mind 



36 PANTHEISM VS* ANTROPOMORPHISM, 

without a material nervous system, that we know of nothing 
which can think without a change of matter, and that we 
know of nothing which can see and hear without eyes and 
ears. 

§ 40. Such are the assumptions on which the anthro- 
morphist founds his faith, and with which he proves it ; 
and most of 'them are absolutely necessary to his system. 
Other testimony he has none. The pantheist on the other 
hand makes no assumptions, but is ready to furnish sound 
and incontrovertible evidence for every principle which he 
advances. 

§ 41. He says that matter and its properties or con- 
ditions are the only existences; that they have ever existed 
and will for ever exist, that the principal of these proper- 
ties are forces which pervade every portion of the universe ; 
that these forces are inherent in matter, inseparable from 
it, portion of its essence, and that they have given to it its 
present shape ; that they govern it and produce all the 
phenomena of nature ; that they act according to universal 
and invariable laws ; that they are the soul of the universe ; 
and that they arrive at consciousness only in the animal 
kingdom. They are the authors of all that is. They hold 
the stars in their places, swing the planets in their orbits 
and lead the solar system in its course through the universe. 
They create light and heat in the sun ; they give life and 
motion to the earth ; they lighten and thunder in the storm ; 
they blow in the breezes ; they keep the waters from stagna- 
tion ; they rush madly over the precipice in the waterfall 
and burst from the bosom of the earth in the fires of the 
volcano ; they roar in the torrent and murmur in the brook ; 
they collect particles of carbon and crystallize them into 
the diamond ; they embody themselves in the grand forms 
of the monster cypress, and pine tree of the Sierra Nevada ; 
they show their capabilities of color and perfume in the 
flowers of the meadow ; they give sensation to the worm, 
industry to the ant, intelligence to the bird and quadruped, 
masculine energy to the man, beauty to the woman, wisdom 
to the sage, eloquence to the orator, sublimity to the poet, 
and love to all the conscious beings of nature. They are 
the speed of the hare, the grace of the gazelle, the strength 
of the lion, the faithfulness of the dog, the courage of the 



WORDSWORTH TO NATURE. 31 

warrior, the dovotion of the martyr, the light of the day, 
and the darkness of the night. They rejoice in the beauti- 
ful harvest, the warm sunshine, the refreshing breeze ; they 
rage in the battles, plagues, floods, and famines. They are 
the soul of all that is, of all that has been, of all that will 
be. Beyond them, there is nothing. They are subject to 
no dominion ; all existence is subject to them. They demand 
no worship ; they are deaf to all prayer ; they will be 
appeased by no sacrifice. They teach man to live for this 
life alone, and to recognize no duty except toward himself, 
or his fellowmen. They inspired their worshipper, when he 
wrote : 

" Nature never did betray 
The heart that loved her ; 't is her privilege 
Through all the years of this our life, to lead 
From joy to joy ; for she can so inform 
The mind that is within us, so impress 
With quietness and beauty, and so feed 
With lofty thoughts, that neither evil tongues 
Kash judgments, nor the sneers of selfish men, 
Nor greetings where no kindness is, nor all 
The dreary intercourse of daily life 
Shall e'er prevail against us, or disturb 
Our cheerful faith, that all which we behold 
Is full of blessings." * 

* Wordsworth. Poem on Revisiting Tintern Abbey. 



CHAPTER III. 

MORAL RESPONSIBILITY. 

''The strongest motive always governs." 

§ 42. " Sin" is defined to mean a violation of a law 
prescribed by an anthropomorphic God, as " vice" is the 
violation of moral law, and " crime " a violation of criminal 
law. Christian philosophers assert that sin includes all kinds 
of vice ; and they assert also that all sins will be punished 
by everlasting pains in hell, unless they are excused accord- 
ing to Paul's platform. On the other hand I say, that, if 
there were such an anthropomorphic divinity, which I deny, 
he could not in justice punish man for any of his actions. 
Men have a right to inflict pain as a preventive of crime ; 
but they have no right to inflict it for any other purpose. 
And the punishments, which they inflict, are very different 
in principle and effect from a hell, which, if it exists, being 
unseen, can not exercise its proper influence in preventing 
violations of the laws, and necessarily takes the character 
of a place where God gratifies his vengeance rather than 
vindicates his justice. 

§ 43. Every man has a character of his own — a mental 
constitution, distinct, peculiar, and different from that of all 
other men. No two are precisely alike. Men born and 
bred together, under the same circumstances, are different 
from each other : one is brave, another cowardly ; one is 
talented, another stupid ; one is magnanimous, another 
mean. Their mental constitutions differ. The grand fact 
is that they have peculiar mental constitutions, — individual 
characters. Now, whence came those constitutions ? Did 
each man make his own mind ? Was it given to him by any 
person, for whose acts he is responsible ? Or was it not born 
with him ? Does it not depend for its nature and powers 
upon the brain ? That personal character has great influence 
on a man's actions, no one will deny. A cowardly man does 
cowardly acts ; a brave man does brave acts ; a good man 



INFLUENCE OF CHARACTER. 39 

does good, a mean man commits base actions. Men are not 
mean, brave, generous, etc., because they perform mean, 
brave, and generous actions ; but these actions are the con- 
sequences, the effect, the expression of a positive character : 
and that character does not change with the actions, but 
remains substantially the same through life. A cowardly 
man may, under the influence of an extraordinary impulse, 
perform a brave action, but that does not make him brave ; 
his character remains the same as it was before. A man's 
actions are influenced not by his character only, but also by 
external circumstances. Thus, if A. enter a crowd, and be- 
gin to strike right and left, B., who is a coward, will run, 
and C, who is brave, will stand and resist. No human action 
can be imagined which is not governed entirely and alone 
by personal character and external circumstances. But both 
these are beyond the control of the individual. A man can 
not become more or less brave, wise, generous, firm, pru- 
dent than he is. Among the many human inventions, there 
is none for altering a man's mental constitution. There is 
no imaginable process of hoping, praying, willing, or striv- 
ing of any value for such a purpose. A man may change 
his position, but he can not change external circumstances. 
He may keep company with good, or bad men, but he can 
not, by a mere effort of mind, make them different from what 
they are. How then, since his actions are governed entirely 
by his character, and by external circumstances, both of 
them beyond his own control, how is he to be held respon- 
sible for those actions by a being who made the character 
and the circumstances ? But suppose that an exceptional 
case be found where an apparent change has taken place 
in a man's character, — that change must have been caused 
to a great extent by external circumstances, aided by forces 
existing in his own mind, which bore within itself the power 
to alter its mode of action ; and therefore, the change is 
not in itself a matter of merit or demerit. 

Man is the slave of motives. He never acts without 
motive ; the very meaning of the word " motive " implies 
impulse to action. He must act with motives, and he can 
not act contrary to them. But a man's motives are not 
under his control. I have a hunger-impulse, a hate-impulse, 
a love-impulse, and other impulses which furnish the mo- 



40 MORAL RESPONSIBILITY. 

tives for my action, and which I can not get rid of, neither 
can I always determine with what strength they shall pre- 
sent their impulses. The strongest motive always gov- 
erns. He who feels hungry, and has a palateable dish 
within his reach, and has no motive for not eating then and 
there, must eat, as a matter of necessity. Men cannot 
create motives by their will, and therefore are not respons- 
ible for their motives. In short, the will is governed by 
the mental constitution, and not the mind by the will. 

§ 44. The purpose of all action is self-gratification. Ev- 
ery action is caused by a motive: every motive is the demand 
of a passion for gratification : every passion is part of the 
mind, part of the self. This man has a base mind; a mind 
in which base passions predominate ; he has base motives, 
and commits base actions. His mental constitution tells 
him to be regardless of the pleasures of other men ; to grasp 
greedily for everything which may conduce to his own im- 
mediate comfort. His neighbor has a magnanimous soul, 
magnanimous passions : his motives are generous, his actions 
are noble. He finds by experience that he has more 
pleasure in rendering others happy, than in looking merely 
after his own bodily comfort. He is generous not for the 
sake of making others happy, but because to make others 
happy, is to make himself happy ; because the conscious- 
ness of having been generous, is one of his keenest pleasures, 
because the impulse to delight in the consciousness of noble 
actions, and in giving pleasure to others, is stronger in his 
mind than the desire for a small physical gratification. 
The martyr who dies at the stake, when he might save his 
life, and even be elevated to high honor, by deserting his 
religion, does the act in accordance with the dictates of his 
own mind ; and by so doing gratifies it. He prefers glori- 
ous death to inglorious life. The man who jumps into the 
water, to save a drowning person, does it to gratify himself. 
He perhaps was present on a previous occasion when a 
man was drowned, and did nothing to save him ; and prob- 
ably spoke to himself, thus : "The danger is nothing ; I do 
not fear it ; to save him would have been a good deed ; his 
death will cause deep pain to his friends and relatives ; I 
might have saved that to them, and given them great joy ; 
had I saved him, he would have always been a most devot- 



EVERY ACT HAS A NECESSARY CAUSE. 41 

ed friend to me ; his sight would have given me joy ; the 
remembrance of the act would be a source of inextinguish- 
able pride and pleasure, so long as I live ; I would obtain 
great credit for doing a brave and noble deed ; the knowl- 
edge of such an action would follow me, wherever I should 
go, and confer an imperishable honor on me ; and the honor 
would be in proportion to the danger. The next time, I 
see a man drowning, I will try to save him, if there be any 
probability of success." If we imagine that a man can 
have any purpose in his actions, save self-gratification, we 
must suppose also that his motives do not come from his 
passions, or that his passions are not part of himself ; or 
that his will is independent of his passions. 

§ 45. Philosophers say that every phenomenon has a 
cause, and that there is apparently a necessary connection 
between the cause and its effect. Now, if men's actions be 
the necessary effects of preexistent causes, and those 
causes again the effects of other preexistent causes, and 
so on up, mounting beyond the birth of the individual, 
he cannot be responsible for his actions. He is only 
a blind link in an endless chain. " According to the 
principle, which denies necessity, and consequently causes, 
a man is as pure and untainted, after having committed 
the most horrid crime, as at the first moment of his birth, 
nor is his character anywise concerned in his actions, since 
they are not derived from it, and the wickedness of the one 
can never be used as a proof of the depravity of the other."* 
All those persons who argue that man is morally respons- 
ible for his actions to a creator, also argue that that creator 
is the great First Cause of every thing which exists, the 
necessary author of every particle of ftiatter, of every move- 
ment of matter, of every natural phenomenon, and of every 
action. But " iff human actions can be traced up by a 
necessary chain to the Deity, they can never be criminal, 
on account of the infinite perfection of that Being, from 
whom they are derived, and who can intend nothing, but 
what is altogether good and laudable. Or, if they be 
criminal, we must retract the attribute of perfection which 
we ascribe to the Deity, and acknowledge him to be the 
ultimate author of guilt and moral turpitude in all his 

* f Hume, Essay on Liberty and Necessity. 



42 MORAL RESPONSIBILITY. 

creatures." And of course, in neither case, could he hold 
men responsible for their unavoidable actions, of which he 
was the necessary cause, the original author, 
r § 46. Different mental faculties are the functions of dif- 
ferent organs, which are distinct parts of the brain : and the 
strength of the faculty depends on the size of the organ. Thus 
the size of the organs determines the character of the man, 
and his character determines his actions : and as he cannot 
change his organs, or alter his character, so he cannot 
avoid doing as he does. Some phrenological writers have 
asserted that the organs were dependent for their size on 
the strength of the faculties, and not vice versa, but this 
statement is as absurd as it would be to say that the size 
of a muscle depends on its strength, instead of its strength 
on its size. 

§ 4T. Every intelligent man has a theory of duty which 
his reason teaches him, and his conscience urges him, to ob- 
serve ; and which he desires to observe strictly, but in vain. 
He feels the struggle between the baser and higher impulses 
of his nature and he must submit occasionally to see the 
latter defeated. No man ever did on all occasions success- 
fully resist temptation to do evil, no matter who or what 
he may have been, or how strongly he desired to do good 
only. And shall we believe that every man can do what 
all men would do if they could, and what no man ever did ? 
The idea is absurd. When all men have the power to resist 
every temptation to do evil, they will no longer be men. 

§ 48. The theories of the theologians are founded on 
the supposition that there is a special mental faculty called 
the " Will," which has the duty and power to restrain all 
the evil impulses. But really, in most cases the impulses 
have more power to restrain the will than the will to re- 
strain the impulses. The will is nothing more than " a vi- 
cissitude of the supremacy of the faculties ;" * and what 
the will shall determine to do, depends principally on the 
strength of the different parts of the mind. If any person 
suppose that he can govern his processes of thought, let him 
ask himself whether, when on some occasion, in the presence 
of a young and beautiful person of the other sex, a desire to 
possess her has not arisen in his mind, — a desire which 

* Vestiges of Creation. 



CRIMINALITY OF UNBELIEF. 43 

would recur to his thoughts in defiance of his most earnest 
endeavors, by willing to drive it away. The will, acting 
on behalf of various faculties, may exercise much influence 
on the thoughts, but is far from having the power to con- 
trol them. If it had such power, men would banish from 
their minds the thoughts which cause them to be unhappy 
Man is a free agent to a certain extent ; he can do as h 
pleases, but he must please to do what his character die 
tates. He may be compared to a chained bear : he is the 
bear, his character is the chain , and external circumstances 
are the post to which he is fastened. 

§ 49. But the Christian deities are not content with 
threatening eternal and infinite misery for deeds done in vio- 
lation of the alleged divine commands : they threaten similar 
punishments to those who do not think that the orthodox 
platform is the only safe conveyance to heaven. The Ca- 
tholic tells me that, unless I believe the Church to be infal- 
lible, I shall go to hell ; the orthodox Protestant tells me 
that, unless I believe in three Gods, I shall go to hell ; the 
strict Unitarian tells me that, unless I believe in one God, 
I shall go to hell ; the Mohammedan tells me that, unless 
I believe in the Arabian prophet, I shall go to hell ; and 
the Mormons tell me that, unless I believe in Brigham 
Young, I shall go to hell. In fact, it matters not which 
way I go, I shall be condemned to at least a dozen hells, 
by as many different sects, disappointed of the little aid and 
comfort which they might have derived from my consenting 
to wear the yoke of their several creeds. If the rejection 
of any doctrine be a proper cause for punishment, then be- 
lief must be a matter of merit and demerit ; then belief 
must be subject to the government of the will ; then men 
should desire to believe that doctrine to be true which is the 
road to heaven, and not that which has the most evidence 
to support it, for in the latter case they would read the Bi- 
ble and the Age of Reason in an impartial state of mind, 
with a disposition to give them " mere indifferent fair play" 
■ — a disposition highly reprobated by the Church. How a 
man can learn that a doctrine is the road to heaven, except 
because it is true ; how he is to find out that it is true, ex- 
cept by examining the evidence on both sides, with a mind 
as nearly impartial as possible ; and how he can assert that 



44 MO&AL RESPONSIBILITY. 

he can control his belief by his will, are matters incompre- 
hensible to me. The Christians tell me that I ought to de- 
sire to believe their dogmas, and that, if I should desire to 
believe, I could believe. That is to say, after I have made 
a full and, as I think, an impartial examination of their evi- 
dences and arguments, and after having arrived at the con- 
clusion that their creed is false and prejudicial to the in- 
terests of humanity, it is still my duty to desire to believe 
it. Perhaps other men can govern their belief by their will, 
but I can not. The offer of ten millions of dollars cash 
reward for my belief, during the space of but five minutes, 
that the sky is green, would make me wish to have such a 
belief ; but the wish would be a vain one. No man, by the 
conscious influence of his will alone, can govern his belief — ■ 
no man ever did — no man ever can — and without the possi- 
bility of such government, there can, according to human 
ideas of justice, be no merit or demerit in belief. 

The constitution of the human mind requires a man to 
have prejudices in favor of the form of faith which prevails 
among all those whom he knows, loves, and respects. The 
Brahmin youth is prejudiced in favor of Brahminism ; the 
Mohammedan youth in favor of Islamism ; the Boodhist 
youth in favor of Boodhism ; the Mormon youth in favor of 
Mormonism ; and the Christian youth in favor of Christian- 
ity. There is no more merit in one prejudice than in an- 
other ; and yet, just that prejudice determines the creed of 
three-fourths of the human race. The different creeds have 
their source in humanity itself ; " they are only so many 
steps in the development of mankind." 

" The two and seventy sects, on earth confessed, 
Collective dwell in every human breast."* 

* Alger. — Oriental Poetry. 



CHAPTER IV. 

ABSOLUTE TRUTH UNATTAINABLE BY MAN. 

* All that we know is that we know nothing." — Socrates. 

§ 50. The purpose of this book is to seek truth, and 
the question now arises : " What is truth ? " The lexico- 
graphers say, it is " conformity to fact." But that defini- 
tion gives no light, for the question immediately follows : 
" What is fact ? n There is a class of philosophers who say 
that man can not prove any thing to be ahsolutely true. 
We shall examine this proposition, and if we find it to be 
correct, we shall have to conclude, that Christianity is built 
on a sandy foundation. We learn, what is ordinarily called 
" truth," or " the reality of things," by sensation and rea- 
son, — and by those only. It was at one time asserted that 
men have " innate" ideas — thoughts born with them ; but 
this theory is now exploded, and metaphysicians agree upon 
the two faculties just mentioned as the sources of all our 
knowledge. Some metaphysicians say that there are two 
kinds of reason, — the w practical," and the " pure ; " but I 
shall use the word " reason " in its common and plain mean- 
ing, as understood by every man. Consciousness, which in- 
forms us of many facts, is a kind of sensation — that kind 
which perceives our own thoughts and impressions. 

§ 51. First then we shall consider the senses as means 
of learning the truth. It is a well understood principle 
among natural as well as speculative philosophers that the 
impressions upon the senses are sometimes not trustworthy ; 
their reports can not be relied upon as infallible. Sound, 
light, color, heat, and odor are conceived by the barbariar 
as " things," material in their nature ; but scientific investi- 
gation has demonstrated that they are merely impressions 
upon the senses caused by different vibrations of the 
gaseous, or aethereal mediums, which surround the body. 
Bass sounds are caused by slow vibrations of the air, strik- 
ing upon the tympanum of the ear • shrill sounds, by rapid 



46 ABSOLUTE T£UTH UNATTAINABLE BY MAN. 

vibrations. So the various ideas of colors are the impres- 
sions on the retina, caused by the different kinds of 
oscillations imparted to the light-medium, by the object 
which we look at. Reason discovers the errors of the 
senses in these cases. In fact, the senses may be said to 
teach nothing clearly. If it were possible that a man 
should grow to mature years without the use of any of his 
senses, and could then be gifted with the use of all of them 
at once, he would at first derive little knowledge from them. 
Things seen would appear upside down, and as though 
immediately against his eyes ; and it would require a long 
course of teaching, and reasoning, before he could know 
what he saw. His sense of touch would not teach him at 
first where the sensation was received ; he would have to 
learn by experience to connect the reports of the various 
nerves with the different parts of the body. If hurt, he 
would feel the pain, but could not tell whence it came. 
And thus it would be more or less with all the senses : the 
teachings all have no clearness, until the mind has learned 
to distinguish the force and meaning of the different 
impressions after much counter observation, remember- 
ing, and comparing. And when once a certain sensation 
has become connected with a certain idea, it is almost 
impossible to separate them. Thus men whose legs have 
been cut off while they were under the influence of chloro- 
form, on returning to consciousness, but before learning of 
the amputation, have complained of pain or itching in 
different toes of the severed foot, and have insisted that 
they were not in error as to the locality of the pain. When 
told that the leg was cut off, they have obstinately refused 
to believe it, and could only be convinced by seeing or 
feeling with the hand. The nerves which led to the ampu- 
tated parts were irritated, and the sensation was referred 
by the brain at once to the place where the nerve came to 
the surface. So when a man's nose is mended with skin 
from his forehead, any sensation in the new flesh is at first 
referred to the place with which the sensations of its nerves 
were from childhood associated. The feelings of touch 
and pain are perceived as though the different parts 
of the body were exclusively conscious of those sensations 
which originate in them severally. Thus, if the finger be 






HALLUCINATIONS. 41 

pinched, the pain is felt there, and not in the head, or any 
other part of the body ; but the sensation is nevertheless 
in the brain. When the pain is perceived, the memory 
immediately discovers the place, by former experience, and 
the feeling is referred by the mind to that place alone. 
But if the nerve be cut which connects the finger with the 
brain, then the finger can be carved or bruised in any 
imaginable manner, and the man has no sensation in it, or 
from it. 

§ 52, All the- senses are subject to " illusions" and 
" hallucinations." It is a notorious fact that many very 
learned, upright, and strong-minded men suppose that they 
see, hear, and feel spirits. Socrates frequently heard a 
" divine voice" as he called it, warning him not to act, as he 
thought of acting ; and he heard this voice often from 
childhood until the time of his death ; and he always 
obeyed it Joan of Arc frequently saw and conversed 
with angels, from the time she was thirteen until she was 
eighteen years of age, when she was executed. Tasso saw 
and conversed with a spirit in the presence of his friend, 
Manso. Luther saw the devil, and threw his inkstand at 
him, Swedenborg saw and conversed with spirits. Brutus 
saw a phantom which told him, it was his evil spirit, and 
would meet him at Philippi. There are not less than a 
thousand persons in the United States now, who say that 
they frequently see or hear, or both see and hear, the spirits 
of deceased human beings, and these persons — like those 
specially named above — sincerely believe in the positive 
reality of these ghosts, and are beyond the suspicion of any 
kind of dishonesty. This perception of ghosts is called a 
" hallucination" by the physiologists, and a special chapter 
is allotted to it in many of the medical text books on 
physiology and insanity, it being generally considered a 
species of cerebral disease. 

§ 53. In dreams, too, the senses deceive us. We hear, 
see, feel, taste and touch, and within the space of a few 
minutes dream of living through long years. The dream- 
impression remaining on the mind, is often as strong as 
that made by the sensations in the waking state, and we 
can distinguish the recollection of the dream from the 
recolJ action of the reality only by seeing that the latter is 



48 ABSOLUTE TRUTH UNATTAINABLE BY MAN. 

connected regularly with our memory of precedent and 
subsequent events, whereas the dream is cut off at 
both ends. 

§ 54. We learn then by the comparison and criticism of 
our various sensations that the senses often deceive us, and 
that we must scrutinize their impressions closely with rea- 
son, before receiving them as trustworthy. The considera- 
tion of the nature of our perceptions, will also show us, 
that the testimony of the senses alone will not suffice -to 
prove anything to be absolutely true. I perceive before me 
a small block of marble ; it is characterized by a certain 
length, breadth, thickness, color, weight, solidity, chemical 
nature of its elements, and mechanical arrangement of its 
particles. I perceive these characteristics, and, indeed, I 
do not perceive anything else. I perceive the properties 
of the matter, not the matter itself. But my idea of these 
properties is merely relative ; I can conceive the property of 
one object only by comparing it with another. There is no 
absolute length ; I arrive at the idea only by comparing 
things which differ in length. So too with color ; if I could 
perceive but one color, there would be no color for me ; it 
would be mere light and shade. The blind have no con- 
ception of color, and perhaps the nearest approach to such 
a conception was on the part of the blind man, who, when 
asked to give a description of scarlet, said, it was like the 
sound of a trumpet : and the same may be said of all the 
properties of bodies. Something depends, too, on the con- 
dition of the organs of sensation : in certain diseases all 
objects appear to the eye as if tinged with different colors, 
according to the nature of the malady. Things which 
appear soft to the tough hands of a man, are hard to the 
tender fingers of infants, etc. We cannot take cog- 
nizance of the ultimate nature of matter, " nor can* 
data be furnished by observation or experiment, on which 
to found an investigation of it." " Of things,f absolutely, 
or in themselves, we know nothing, or know them only aa 
incognizable ; and we become aware of their incomprehens- 
ible existence only, as this is indirectly revealed to us 
through certain qualities related to our faculties of knowl- 

* Brande. 

f Sip* Wji. Hamilton. 



THE ME AND THE N0T-ME. 49 

edge. All that we know is, therefore, phenomenal, phenom- 
enal of the unknown." We cannot perceive matter itself, 
and we cannot prove the absolute existence of those 
properties which we connect with the idea of matter. 

I say that I perceive not the matter, but only its 
properties ; and I can perceive the properties only as in re- 
lation to other properties. But do I really perceive the 
properties ? No ; I perceive only my idea of the properties. 
My perception is conscious of a thought, and of nothing 
more ; it is impossible from its nature that it should be con- 
scious of any thing else. I think that I see the block of 
marble, and that thought is the only evidence which I can 
have that I do see it. I can not go beyond that thought 
to obtain evidence that the marble exists, and is such a thing 
as I conceive it to be. I can not discover any necessary 
reason why the thought should accurately represent the ex- 
istence and nature of the marble. Man knows of his exist- 
ence only by thinking, by an idea ; he knows there is a sun 
only because he sees it, because he thinks he sees it. He 
can not get beyond the idea ; perhaps the idea agrees to the 
actual fact ; perhaps it does not ; perhaps there is nothing 
but the idea. There is no positive evidence — not the re- 
motest particle of evidence — that any thing exists indepen- 
dently of man's idea, or that, if there be any independent 
existence, it is as the idea represents it to be. " All the 
choir of heaven, and furniture of earth, all those bodies 
which compose the mighty frame of the world, have not any 
subsistence without a mind," and subsists only while it con- 
ceives them. All things, as conceived by us, may be classed 
under two heads, the " Me," and the " Not-me." The Me 
is myself, the idea of my own thought ; the Not-me is my 
idea of matter and of all things, except my thought. For 
all that we can know to the contrary by absolute proof, the 
Not-me exists only in the imagination of the Me. The lat- 
ter, considered philosophically, is not only the cause, but 
also the essence of all existence, and of all reality.* If sub- 
stance exists absolutely, then the Me is the only' substance, 
and the Not-me is merely qualities of it. Every thing ex- 
ists only in and for the Me. Take away the Me, and no- 
thing is left. It makes the conditions of all knowledge, 

* Schelling. — Das Unbedingte. §§ 10. 11. 12. 13. 



50 ABSOLUTE TRUTH UNATTAINABLE BY MAN. 

describes the spheres of every thing conceivable, and, as the 
Absolute and All-including, governs our whole system of 
thought. All phenomena are merely conditions of the 
" Me." The universe lies inside of the thinker, not outside 
of him. In referring all impressions to a subjective source, 
and denying objective existence, the idealist returns to hia 
original mode of thought. " If," says Morell, " we oould, 
by any means, transport ourselves into the mind of an in- 
fant, before the perceptive consciousness is awakened, we 
should find it in a 'state of absolute isolation from every 
thing else in the world around it. Whatever objects may 
be presented to the eye, the ear, or the touch, they are 
treated simply as subjective feelings, without the mind pos- 
sessing any consciousness of them as objects, at all. To it, 
the inward world is every thing, the outward world is no- 
thing." Such is infant's mode of thought, to which modern 
philosophy endeavors to return, in so far as such a thing is 
possible. Nearly all the metaphysicians of the last hundred 
years were idealists, and such men as Diderot, D'Alembert, 
Mackintosh, Dugald Stewart, Brougham, and Carlyle, have 
approved Turgors opinion that he, who has never rejected 
the absolute existence of matter, has no talent for metaphy- 
sical reasoning. The great opponent of this idealistic theory 
was Keid, and he substantially confessed that it was im- 
pregnable against every possible attack. His great argument 
was that the idealists did not believe their own doctrines, 
for they would not run themselves through with swords. 
But there is really no inconsistency between the practise 
and theory of the idealists ; they always have acknowledged 
the relative existence of matter, — such a kind of existence 
as for all practical purposes is the same as if it were abso- 
lute. Man is the slave of his dream — of his idea. He is 
governed by certain laws which must not be violated. The 
sword is a mere idea, and yet, to run a sword-idea through 
a man-idea, is to violate a rule of the dreamer's existence, 
and a pain-idea, or a death-idea, is the consequence. 

§ 55. Memory may be said to be the present conscious- 
ness of past events — the reviving of old sensations. This is 
a kind of knowledge which, like other kinds, has its defects. 
We imagine sometimes that real events occurred only in 
dream, and that events dreamed occurred in actual life, and 



CHRISTOPHER SLY. 51 

in such cases, there is no certain criterion of absolute knowl- 
edge. Shakespeare* represents a certain Christopher Sly, 
a drunken vagabond, who had lived in misery and dirt all 
his life, as having been taken up while intoxicated and 
asleep, and placed in bed in the palace of a lord. When he 
had grown sober and awakened, he found a multitude of 
servants waiting upon him, and the principal ones asked anx- 
iously how he was, expressed great joy at his recovery, 
and wished to know his commands. He replied that he was 
quite well, he was Christopher Sly, he dwelt in such a place. 
They told him that he w r as the hereditary lord of that cas- 
tle, but had been crazy since childhood, and had supposed 
himself to be a certain Christopher Sly, vagabondizing, 
drinking bad liquor, keeping low company, and lying in the 
gutters. Finally Christopher was persuaded that all his 
past life was a dream, and he began to act the lord. He 
soon got drunk, his fine clothes were taken off, his old rags 
put on, and he was again placed in the gutter. When he 
came to himself, it was some time before he could get back 
to the idea that he was only Christopher Sly, and then he 
came to the conclusion that his lordship was only a dream. 
In this story Shakespeare has painted the nature of human 
knowledge truly. No man has any more secure knowledge of 
the past than Christopher Sly had : and he acted in accord- 
ance with the principles which ought to govern a philoso- 
phic mind. There is no man who, by skillful management, 
might not be brought to believe all his past life to be only 
a dream, an unreality, — the wild imaginings of insanity. 

§ 56. We may now pretty safely say that the testi- 
mony of the senses can not suffice to prove any proposition 
to be absolutely true : and therefore we turn to reason and 
ask what she can do. She tells us at once that she is fal- 
lible : and in such case, we cannot rely upon her conclusions 
as infallibly or absolutely true. Truth is said, by meta- 
physicians, to be "necessary" or "contingent :" arguments 
are " demonstrative " or " probable." The only truth which 
is "neeessary" and the only arguments which are "demon- 
strative " are found in mathematics, or what are called the 
" exact sciences." Men may and will differ in their opinions 
about moral, political and religious philosophy and about 

* Prologue to ; Taming the Shrew.' 



52 ABSOLUTE TRUTH UNATTAINABLE BY MAN. 

natural science : but all men admit the truth of the propo- 
sition that two and two make four : and so of other mathe- 
matical propositions generally. But if we examine the 
nature of these propositions we shall find that they are 
"necessary" truths, and their "arguments" are " demon- 
strative "and their science is "exact" because the truth 
is implied in the definition of the original terms. No man 
will deny that two and two make four, simply because the 
word " four" means something made of two and two. The 
absolute impossibility of escaping from a definition was well 
discovered by a little boy in a Sunday school, whose class 
was told by the teacher that God could do anything. The 
scholar said he knew something that God could not do. 
After a proper expression of horror at the supposed blas- 
phemy, the teacher demanded what it was that God could 
not do. The juvenile skeptic replied, " He can't make a 
four-year-old colt in a minute": and after some study the 
teacher concluded that the boy was right ; even Omnipo- 
tence must fail in attempting such a task. 

§ 57. Perhaps in no point is the inability of the mind 
to discover absolute truth shown more strikingly than in 
the fact that we cannot discover any necessary connection 
between cause and effect. We speak of a necessary effect, 
but the necessity is a mere presumption. We know that 
certain phenomena are always followed by certain other 
phenomena, and we call the former cause and the latter 
effect : and because the connection is invariable we call it 
necessary. We learn the connection by experience : we 
never could learn it by abstract reasoning. If some new 
natural object were discovered to-morrow, we could not 
know what effect it would produce under certain imagina- 
ble circumstances except by experiment, or guessing from 
the result of previous experience with other substances to 
which the new object appeared to bear a resemblance. We 
may discover a vast number of intermediate causes inter- 
vening between remote causes and effects, but the necessity 
of the connection is none the more clear. A blow on the 
hand gives pain, because the flesh is bruised ; because the 
bruise prevents the healthy circulation of blood ; because 
without healthy circulation of the blood, the nerves are not 
supplied properly with the material requisite for their nor- 



NECESSARY CONNECTION. 53 

mal action, and because when they have not such material 
they complain of pain. But we have come no nearer to 
the discoyery of the necessary connection after tracing all 
these intermediate steps than we were before. The phy- 
siologist will argue to you that the blow must give pain, 
because — and here he traces all the intermediate causes, 
and shows that these causes always have produced these 
effects, heretofore and therefore must always do so here- 
after. " Philosophy" says Solly " is the discovery of the 
universality of a fact." We say that wherever one phenom- 
enon is invariably followed by another, the former is the 
cause and the latter the effect. And yet we do not say 
that day is the cause of night or night of day. But in 
these cases we discover intermediate sequences which con- 
nect day and night with the changing positions of the sun, 
and not with each other in the relation called cause and 
effect. 

§ 58. Reason cannot alone prove anything to be 
absolutely true, because in its very nature it can only draw 
conclusions from admitted premises. All argumentation, 
which is the only and exclusive domain of reason, may be 
reduced to syllogisms. Every syllogism is necessarily com- 
posed of three parts, a major premise, a minor premise, 
and a conclusion. Here is an example : 

Major Premise. — All men are mortal. 

Minor Premise. — James is a man. 

Conclusion. — James is mortal. 

Without a major and a minor premise, expressed or 
understood, there can be no syllogistic conclusion — no sound 
argument. The truth of the two premises is always 
assumed in any single syllogism, but they may be proved 
in other syllogisms. The major premise in the above syl- 
logism may be proved as follows : 

1. All animals are mortal. 

2. All men are animals. 

3. All men are mortal. 

By rising in that manner from one syllogism to another, 
we at last arrive at the great original premise, on which 
all knowledge is based — " I exist." As this is the last 
of all premises, so it cannot be proved by reason. We 
must accept it for what it is worth in the testimony of 



54 ABSOLUTE TRUTH UNATTAINABLE BY MAN. 

consciousness. " The absolute existence of the ' Me,' n says 
Schelling,* " lies beyond the possibility of objective 
proof ***. My selfhood implies an existence which precedes 
all thinking and representation. Its existence consists in 
its conception of itself, and it is conceived because it exists, 
because it exists and is conceived only so far as it conceives 
itself." " Exceptf some first principles be taken for 
granted, there can be neither reason, nor reasoning. It is 
impossible that every truth should admit of proof, other- 
wise proof would extend ad infinitum. If ever men attempt 
to prove a first principle, it is because they are ignorant of the 
nature of proof." Abercombie, one of the most acute of the 
late metaphysicians, whose associations and character were 
not favorable to idealistic prejudices, says : " Many ingenious 
but fallacious arguments were at one time wasted in 
attempting to establish by processes of reasoning" the pro- 
positions " that we exist, that external things are as they 
appear, that our memory must tell truth, and that every 
event must have a cause"; and in making that admission, 
he speaks the general opinion of the speculative philo- 
sophers of the ago. "It is supposed J by many, that by 
means of reasoning we can arrive at conceptions, of which 
we have no previous idea, whatever. This supposition, how- 
ever, it is almost needless to say, will not bear examination. 
Whether our reasoning be inductive or deductive, the con- 
clusion of the whole is always virtually involved in the 
premises. To reason at all, we must have certain data, 
and must also employ distinct and intelligible terms ; but 
it is evident these data and these terms always imply an 
amount of experience in the question, without which all our 
reasoning would be empty, and beyond which our conclusion 
can never go. Logical reasoning alters the relations of our 
ideas — it never transcends them. It makes our knowledge 
more distinct : it does not expand the horizon of our men- 
tal vision." Between the physiologists, who prove that mind 
cannot exist, except as dependent upon matter, and the 
psychologists, who prove that the existence of matter cau- 
not be demonstrated, absolute truth seems to fare badly. 

* Das Unbedingte § 3. 

f Aristotle. Translated in Abercombie on the Intellectual Powers. 

% Mouell. Philosophy of Keligion. 



WHAT IS TRUTH ? 55 

It may be asked, " If there be no truth, why this book ?" 
But I have not said there is no truth ; I have merely 
denied the possibility of attaining absolute truth ; I recog- 
nize the existence and high importance of relative truth. 
I admit, that men must live as if there were an absolute, 
outward, material world ; I do not wish a body to kick me, 
because I assert that he cannot prove himself to be an 
actual body, independently of my thought. I merely wish 
to question his absolute being, when he comes to dogma 
tize at me. 

§ 59. But what is truth ? The Boodhist, the Moham- 
medan, the Brahmin, the Christian, and the Mormon, each 
asserts that his faith is true, and each is ready to prove 
the sincerity of his assertion by martyrdom, if necessary 
Is there no truth ? Or may a dozen propositions, inconsis 
tent with each other, all be true ? How shall I know 
whether my neighbor is right or myself, when we come to 
different conclusions, reasoning from the same premises ? 
Is there no criterion of truth, to which all mankind can 
resort for the purpose of harmonizing their opinions, as 
weights and measures are regulated according to standards 
fixed by government ? No ! there is no such criterion. 
The history of Philosophy may be sought through in vain 
for any touchstone by which truth is to be known. Christian 
theologians-once pretended that they had found the standard 
in the Bible, but the pretension is now abandoned. Truth 
is not " conformity to fact," but it is " the conformity of a 
proposition, with the constitution of the human mind." 
What that constitution is, every one must discover for him- 
self, in his own soul ; and since minds are not all alike, so 
truth is not the same for all men. Beauty and morality 
are akin to truth, in so far as they are the conformity ot 
moral principles, or of objects perceived by the senses, to 
the constitution of the mind ; and in regard to them, too, 
there are diversities of opinions among men equally wise 
and benevolent. Much that is true for me, is false for my 
neighbor. Scarcely any proposition can be imagined more 
evidently true to a savage, than that the sun revolves round 
the earth, or moves through the sky from East to West 
everyday; and it is just as evidently false to me. Why do 
we differ ? Because our states of mental enlightenment 



56 ABSOLUTE TRUTH UNATTAINABLE BY MAN 

differ. Because I know more of the constitution of my 
mind, than he does of his. The investigation of truth is 
the examination of the laws of one's own mind. As Emer- 
son says, the human soul is the text of all study. The 
books of the historians, poets and philosophers, are only 
the comments upon it. I read in them only, to find the 
meaning and capabilities of myself. When I read the 
history of the Athenian democracy, consider the progress of 
the American republic, study the details of Napoleon's 
campaigns, look at Carlyle's picture of the French revo- 
lution, or become absorbed in Faust or Jane Eyre, I am 
learning what there is in my own brain. All the great 
works of great men are to me as though done by myself, 
— unconsciously — in a state of mental exaltation ; and I 
need to look over those works, to see whether I can not 
raise myself to the level of that, exaltation, and preserve 
myself there. When I seek truth, I seek to know what is 
within me, — not what is without. When I am true to my 
convictions, when I speak and act according to my faith, 
I do my duty to my own soul, — not to some idol which 
exists outside and in despite of me. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Dec. 2004 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



^^^ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




013 652 458 6 



